Parties to a bench trial shall comply with the following procedures and requirements. The parties must order the transcript upon the completion of the trial. Thirty-five days after completion of the transcript, the parties must jointly file a Proposed Statement of Stipulated Facts. The parties must reasonably agree on the Proposed Statement of Stipulated Facts. The Court understands that facts and the inferences drawn from facts can be—and usually are—very different. Undisputed facts should be admitted and the inferences drawn from those facts can be litigated in the memoranda of law. The Proposed Statement of Stipulated Facts should be filed with the Court and a courtesy copy provided in Word format to Judge Iasparro’s proposed order inbox:  Proposed_Order_Iasparro@ilnd.uscourts.gov.

 Twenty-one days after the filing of the Proposed Statement of Stipulated Facts, the plaintiff(s) shall file a memorandum of law with citations to the trial transcript and pertinent authority, along with any supplemental statements of fact not in the Statement of Stipulated Facts. Twenty-one days after the filing of the plaintiff’s memorandum, the defendant shall file a response brief, along with any supplemental statements of fact not in the Statement of Stipulated Facts and responses to the plaintiff’s supplemental statements of fact. Fourteen days after the filing of the response brief, the plaintiff shall file a reply brief and responses to the defendant’s supplemental statements of fact. All supplemental statements of fact and responses to supplemental statements of fact shall include citations to the transcript.

Standing Order Governing Proposed Final Pretrial Orders

Civil Jury Trial Procedures

Jury Evidence Recording System (JERS)

Voir Dire Questions

No Post-Trial Contact with Jurors

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDERS

Before requesting entry of a confidentiality order to preserve the confidentiality of materials disclosed in discovery, counsel shall carefully review Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), which requires that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with other affected parties in an effort to resolve the dispute without court action.

For confidentiality orders in civil cases, to the extent possible, counsel should use the Model Confidentiality Order developed by the Northern District of Illinois. Any proposed confidentiality order must be submitted to Judge Iasparro’s proposed order inbox in Word format:  Proposed_Order_Iasparro@ilnd.uscourts.gov. A corresponding motion for a confidentiality order should also be filed on the docket, unless the Court has given prior leave to submit a confidentiality order without a motion. Counsel shall identify whether the motion is agreed or if any party has an objection.

If the proposed confidentiality order differs from the model, in addition to a clean Word version of the revised model order, counsel must submit a redlined copy showing any changes. The clean and redlined copies of the confidentiality order shall be submitted to Judge Iasparro’s proposed order inbox. If the confidentiality order anticipates that any documents or confidential materials submitted to the court are to be filed under seal, the confidentiality order must include, at a minimum, a carefully-drafted definition of the materials to be protected, with an explanation of why these documents are entitled to protection. No document shall be filed under seal unless counsel secures a court order allowing the filing of a document under seal. See Local Rule 26.2.

HIPAA QUALIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDERS

The Court reminds counsel that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and its regulations create a procedure for obtaining authority to use medical records in litigation, including requesting a qualified protective order. 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e). A “qualified protective order” means an order that: (1) prohibits the parties from using or disclosing the protected health information for any purpose other than the litigation for which such information was requested; and (2) requires the return to the covered entity or destruction of the protected health information (including all copies made) at the end of the litigation. 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(e)(1)(v).

For qualified protective orders, to the extent possible, counsel should use the Example HIPAA Qualified Protective Order developed by the Northern District of Illinois. Any proposed qualified protective order must be provided to Judge Iasparro’s proposed order inbox in Word format. A corresponding motion for a qualified protective order should also be filed on the docket, unless the Court has given prior leave to submit a qualified protective order without a motion. Counsel shall identify whether the motion is agreed or if any party has an objection.

If the proposed qualified protective order differs from the model, in addition to a clean Word version of the revised model order, counsel must provide a redlined copy showing any changes. The clean and redlined copies of the qualified protective order shall be submitted to Judge Iasparro’s proposed order inbox in Word format:  Proposed_Order_Iasparro@ilnd.uscourts.gov. 

Judge Iasparro encourages parties to consent to his jurisdiction so that he may preside over the entirety of the case, including ruling on dispositive motions and presiding over any trial. Parties may also decide to consent to his jurisdiction for limited purposes, such as for ruling on a Pavey hearing. Because Judge Iasparro does not handle felony criminal trials, he generally is able to accommodate the requests of counsel for particular (and firm) trial dates. Parties are encouraged to read 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73 regarding trial by consent and discuss this option with their clients and opposing counsel.

If all parties consent to the jurisdiction of Judge Iasparro for all or part of a proceeding, they should file their joint consent using the appropriate form below. In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1), Judge Iasparro should be informed only if all parties agree to proceed before him on consent.

Magistrate Judge Consent Form  

Limited Consent Form

Default is a drastic remedy. Consequently, the process used must be carefully followed, including providing the proper notice to the party against which default is being sought (“defaulting party”). Default judgments sought under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) require a two-step process. Counsel must not conflate the two procedures and must rigorously adhere to the time frames specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 55.

First, there must be an entry of default, either by the Clerk of the Court or by a court order directing the Clerk to enter the default. A written request for an entry of default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a) shall be accompanied by an affidavit or declaration showing that the defaulting party: (1) is not an infant, in the military, or an incompetent person; (2) has failed to plead or otherwise defend the action; and (3) has been properly served with the pleading. A copy of the proof of service must also be attached to the motion if not already docketed.

Second, there must be a motion for default judgment. A party moving for a default judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) shall file a motion and supporting legal documents. Following the filing of the motion, the party should notify the Court’s operations specialist to set a date and time for a hearing on the motion. Service of the motion for default judgment must occur at least 7 days before the motion for default judgment is presented. The Court will strike all motions for default judgment that fail to provide sufficient notice. The moving party shall also append as exhibits to the motion for default judgment: (1) a copy of the Clerk’s entry of default; (2) supporting affidavits or declarations; and (3) a proposed form of default judgment. The motion, exhibits, and notice of the date and time of the hearing shall be mailed by regular and certified mail to the defaulting party at the last known address of the defaulting party. A copy of the return receipt evidencing delivery, when returned by the post office, shall be filed with the Court.

In cases involving joint and several liability, it may be premature to move for a default judgment against one defendant in a multi-defendant case because a damages hearing will not be held until the liability of each non-defaulting defendant has been resolved. See In re Uranium Antitrust Litig., 617F.2d 1248, 1262 (7th Cir. 1980). However, a determination of damages against the defaulting party can be made if the claims against the non-defaulting parties are dismissed. See Domanus v. Lewcki, 742 F.3d 290, 304 (7th Cir. 2014).

As provided by Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(1), a default judgment for a sum certain may be sought from the Clerk by written request accompanied by an affidavit providing the information detailed in the rule.

Failure to comply with this standing order will result in the denial of the motion.

The Court believes the parties can and should resolve most discovery disputes themselves. The Court will not consider any discovery motions unless the parties have complied with the meet-and-confer requirement under Local Rule 37.2. Any discovery motion must state with specificity when and how the movant complied with Local Rule 37.2.

Parties are reminded that compliance with Local Rule 37.2 requires a good faith effort to resolve discovery disputes and, other than in exceptional circumstances, requires communication that takes place face-to-face (including by video) or by telephone. The Court prefers a face-to-face or video meeting; the mere exchange of correspondence, including email, normally will not be sufficient to comply with Local Rule 37.2. The Court considers failure to seriously engage in the meet-and-confer process to be grounds for denial of the motion.

Any response to a contested discovery motion must be filed within 3 business days of when the motion is filed. No replies in support of discovery motions shall be filed absent leave of court. The Court will generally decide discovery motions without hearing oral argument. If the Court believes a hearing is necessary, the Court will so order. If a hearing is set on a discovery motion, all parties should be fully prepared to argue any discovery motion on that date. The Court may rule on the discovery motion during or after the hearing and without further briefing. If after hearing argument, the Court believes that the motion requires any further briefing, the Court normally will set an expedited briefing schedule so that the matter can be resolved promptly.

Any motions to compel must identify and attach the specific discovery requests at issue, as well as the opposing party’s response (i.e., motions must not simply identify specific “categories” of documents or discovery that the movant seeks). Motions to compel must also include arguments supporting the relevancy and proportionality of the requested discovery and the parties’ meet and confer efforts. Motions to compel may be summarily stricken for a failure to comply with this order. Moreover, parties must not seek overbroad requests in the hope that the Court will tailor the resolution on its own; each discovery request will be adjudicated based on the totality of the request, so parties should appropriately narrow their requests ahead of time. Failure to do so may result in denial of the motion to compel with prejudice; the Court will not tailor a discovery request for the party when it could have done it on its own.

Parties must immediately notify the Court if they are withdrawing (or narrowing) any previously filed discovery motion.

Any motion to extend discovery deadlines must be presented in writing (after conferral with the other side), filed in advance of the discovery deadline, and must present the opposing party’s position and demonstrate good cause for the extension.

With respect to disputes over electronic discovery, if the parties have reached an impasse regarding the discovery or records from a database, server, computer, service provider or similar electronic storage facility (ESF), before filing a motion to compel, the parties are required to meet and confer with a qualified and knowledgeable IT representative for each party in order to determine the most effective and feasible ways to retrieve the requested material, as well as the proper format for the retrieval of the records. This electronic discovery conference must take place in person or via video, and both sides should be prepared to discuss specifically the parameters of both the search(es) and the ESF.

To qualify as an “emergency,” a motion must arise from an unforeseen circumstance that arises suddenly and unexpectedly, and that requires immediate action in order to avoid serious or irreparable harm to one or more of the parties. Motions for extension of time for filing, or for continuances of deadlines or other dates previously set by the Court, are highly unlikely to qualify as “emergencies.” In the event a party seeks to present an emergency motion, that party must inform the Court’s operations specialist by email at Veronica_Klaus@ilnd.uscourts.gov prior to filing the motion of the general nature of the motion and the reason that it requires emergency treatment, so that it can be determined if emergency treatment is appropriate. A party seeking to present an emergency motion must make all reasonable efforts to provide the opposing party with actual notice of the motion.

At the initial status hearing on cases brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Court will provide a deadline for filing a joint proposed FLSA Scheduling Order in lieu of a proposed Case Management Order. The parties must use the following fillable form for the proposed FLSA Scheduling Order. It shall not be retyped. Upon completion, the parties shall file the proposed FLSA Scheduling Order and submit a copy to the Court’s proposed order inbox at Proposed_Order_Iasparro@ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Judge Iasparro will generally set an initial in-person status conference upon assignment of cases by consent, designation, or referral within 60 days of the case being assigned. Within the order setting the case for an initial status conference, the Court will also set a deadline by which the parties must submit a Joint Initial Status Report and Proposed Case Management Order.

The parties must confer pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) and cooperate in preparing the Joint Initial Status Report and Proposed Case Management Order. The parties must use the following fillable form for the Joint Initial Status Report and Proposed Case Management Order. It shall not be retyped. Additional pages may be attached for information that does not fit on the form, such as the names of additional parties and/or counsel.

At the initial status conference, the Court expects to set a discovery schedule, briefing schedules that may be necessary, and other deadlines and timetables applicable to the case. Accordingly, lead trial counsel for each party, or an attorney with substantial familiarity with and responsibility for the case, must appear in person at the initial status conference and be prepared to discuss all aspects of the case, to include but not be limited to the following:

1.         Whether all necessary parties have been named and served;

2.         The basis for federal jurisdiction, including, without limitation, the determination of membership and citizenship for business entities where diversity forms the basis of jurisdiction;

3.         The general nature of the claims and any counterclaims, and the major contested legal and factual issues;

4.         The nature of any responsive pleadings or motions that have been filed or are anticipated;

5.         The relief sought by the plaintiff(s), the amount in controversy, elements of damages, and whether there is insurance coverage;

6.         The possibility of settlement;

7.         The nature, scope and scheduling of discovery, particularly discovery that is necessary to engage in meaningful settlement negotiations and so should be given priority; and

8.         The probable length of any trial.

Judge Iasparro encourages the parties to discuss and prepare a more detailed presentation of issues, and identify those issues in the Joint Initial Status Report and Proposed Case Management Order, when complexity so requires.

Parties are not to notice motions for presentment. The Court will notify the parties of the need, if any, for a hearing on the motion.

The Court requests that the body of any motion state whether the motion is joint or if the other parties have authorized the movant to state that the parties either agree to the motion or have no objection to it. The Court notes that this requirement necessitates the parties communicating about the filing of any motion before it gets filed, which will hopefully alleviate the filing of unnecessary motions. If a party is seeking to enforce a subpoena on a non-party, the party must provide notice of the motion to that non-party.

Absent leave of Court, memoranda of law must comply with the 15-page limitation set forth in Local Rule 7.1. The Court reminds the parties that they should follow Local Rule 5.2, which provides that “[a] judge’s paper copy shall be bound on the left side and shall include protruding tabs for exhibits. A list of exhibits must be provided for each document that contains more than one exhibit.” While the Court will exercise its discretion to the extent parties are unable to comply with the formalities of Local Rule 5.2, the Court appreciates paper copies that are compiled in an orderly and organized fashion.

Any motion to extend time must be presented in writing (after conferral with the other side), filed in advance of the discovery deadline, and must present the opposing party’s position and demonstrate good cause for the extension.

Parties are asked to submit courtesy copies of all motions, including exhibits. Please deliver courtesy copies to Judge Iasparro’s operations specialist in the Clerk’s Office, Room 2200, within one business day of filing. Courtesy copies should include the printed CM/ECF header at the top of every page.

Motions to strike are strongly disfavored. See Custom Vehicles, Inc. v. Forest River, Inc., 464 F.3d 725, 727 (7th Cir. 2006) (Easterbrook, J., in chambers). For example, if a party believes that the other side’s brief contains inaccurate facts or that the other side’s Local Rule 56.1 statement (in summary judgment briefing) contains an unsupported assertion, then the complaining party should make that argument in the response or reply brief.

Likewise, the Court recognizes that raising arguments for the first time in a reply brief is “dirty pool.” In re Leventhal, No. 10 B 12257, 2012 WL 1067568, at *3 n.3 (N.D. Ill. 2012). The Court is capable of seeing that practice for what it is. There is no need to file a motion to strike the reply brief. Indeed, motions to strike should be constrained to their limited scope as identified in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f).

The Court requires strict compliance with Local Rule 56.1 in the briefing of all summary judgment motions. Any party moving for summary judgment against a party proceeding pro se must also comply with Local Rule 56.2. In addition, to assist the Court in reviewing the factual record submitted in connection with summary judgment motions, the Court requires the following:

A courtesy copy of the memorandum of law, depositions, and other materials relied upon in support of the motion (as required by Local Rule 56.1(a)(1)-(3)) or in opposition of the motion (as required by Local Rule 56.1(b)(1)-(3)) must be delivered to Judge Iasparro’s operations specialist in the Clerk’s Office, Room 2200, within one business day of filing. The courtesy copy of the compendium must be securely bound, must separately tab each document, and must contain an index identifying what document is contained under each tab. It must also have the CM/ECF header.

All statements of undisputed material facts offered by the moving party under Local Rule 56.1(a)(3), or statements of additional facts offered by the opposing party under Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(C), must list the facts in short, numbered paragraphs that refrain from argument. Argument must be reserved for the parties’ memorandum of law. Each numbered fact statement must contain a specific citation to affidavits, depositions, or other materials that support the fact statement, as well as a specific citation to the tab(s) in the compendium where those materials may be found. Failure to provide support for a statement of fact may result in that alleged “fact” being disregarded. See Friend v. Valley View Community Unit School Dist. 365U, 789 F.3d 707, 710–11 (7th Cir. 2015).

All responses to statements of undisputed material facts offered by the opposing party under Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(B), or responses to statements of additional facts offered by the moving party under Local Rule 56.1(a), shall be in a format similar to that used in answering a complaint: that is, the response must repeat each numbered paragraph of the fact statement, and then immediately following each numbered statement must state whether the alleged fact is “undisputed” or “disputed.” As with the fact statements submitted under Local Rules 56.1(a)(3) and 56.1(b)(3)(C), the responses to those fact statements must refrain from argument. The significance or lack of significance of a disputed or undisputed fact may be argued in the respondent’s legal memorandum. If a particular fact is undisputed, nothing more should be said in the response. If a particular fact assertion is disputed in whole or in part, the response must state what part of the assertion is disputed and must contain a specific citation to the supporting affidavits, depositions, or other materials as well as a specific citation to the tab(s) in the compendium where those materials may be found. Failure to provide support for an alleged fact dispute may result in that fact being deemed admitted. See Curtis v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 807 F.3d 215, 218-19 (7th Cir. 2015).

In accordance with Local Rule 56.1, absent prior leave of Court, a movant shall not file more than 80 separately numbered statements of undisputed material fact, and a party opposing a summary judgment motion shall not file more than 40 separately numbered statements of additional fact under Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(C). The Court reminds parties that the fact statements under Local Rule 56.1(a)(3) and Local Rule 56.1(b)(3)(C) “shall consist of short numbered paragraphs.”

Motions to strike and motions to deem facts admitted will not be accepted by the Court. These concerns should be raised in the parties’ briefs or in their responsive Local Rule 56.1 statements.

In the event that a party withholds otherwise discoverable information on the ground of privilege, the withholding party generally must provide a log of the documents withheld on the ground of privilege. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5)(A) and Advisory Committee Comments to 1993 Amendments. Any privilege log must be detailed enough to enable other parties to assess the applicability of the privilege asserted, and should include:

(1) the name and capacity of each individual from whom or to whom a document and any attachments were sent (including which persons are lawyers);

(2) the date of the document and any attachments;

(3) the type of document;

(4) the Bates numbers of the documents;

(5) the nature of the privilege asserted; and

(6) a description of the subject matter in sufficient detail to determine if legal advice was sought or revealed, or if the document constitutes work product. See RBS Citizens, N.A. v. Husain, 291 F.R.D. 209, 218 (N.D. Ill. 2013).

The Court reminds the parties that the meet-and-confer requirements of Local Rule 37.2 apply to privilege disputes, just as they do to other discovery disputes.

Standing Order for Settlement Conferences

The Supplemental Rules for Social Security Actions under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) govern Social Security disability appeals. Unless the Court has set a different briefing schedule, the following schedule applies. The Commissioner shall file a certified copy of the administrative record within 60 days of notice of the action. Suppl. Rule 4. Plaintiff’s opening brief requesting remand or reversal of the Commissioner’s final decision must be filed within 30 days of the filing of the administrative record. Suppl. Rule 6. The Commissioner’s response brief in support of the final decision is due 30 days thereafter. Suppl. Rule 7. Plaintiff may file a reply brief within 14 days of the Commissioner’s response brief being filed. Suppl. Rule 8.

Motions for summary judgment are not required; the action is presented for decision by the parties’ briefs. Suppl. Rule 5. Absent leave of Court, all briefs must comply with the 15-page limitation set forth in Local Rule 7.1.

Proposed orders are technically not to be “filed.” Rather, they are to be “submitted” to the judge to consider, modify (if appropriate) and enter electronically. For example, proposed orders such as stipulated protective orders require court approval before being given full effect. To prevent confusion, such proposed orders must be attached to an email sent to Judge Iasparro’s proposed order inbox:  Proposed_Order_Iasparro@ilnd.uscourts.gov. The subject line of the email must include the case number and name, the docket number of the corresponding motion, and the title of the order that is proposed. All such documents must be submitted to the Court in a format compatible with Word. Such proposed orders should also be served on all parties.