A. Confidentiality Agreement Among the Parties (No Court Order is Necessary)

The parties may properly agree among themselves to limit disclosure of unfiled discovery information to certain specified persons during the litigation and not to voluntarily disseminate such information to other persons. Court approval of such an agreement or a court order is not necessary. Such an agreement may well address most of the parties’ confidentiality concerns since only a small subset of discovery is typically ever filed in the public court record or used during a court proceeding.

B.  Confidentiality/Protective Orders: If the parties require a confidentiality order be entered by the Court, they are directed to use the model confidentiality order approved by the full Court and set forth in the Local Rules: Form LR 26.2 Model Confidentiality Order. While the parties may deviate from the model order, any additions and deletions are to be red-lined. A request for entry of an agreed confidentiality order should be submitted after a corresponding motion has been filed unless the Court has given prior leave to submit an agreed confidentiality order without a motion. An agreed confidentiality order should be sent to the Court's Proposed Order Box at Proposed_Order_Berry@ilnd.uscourts.gov. The parties are to submit BOTH a red-lined version and a clean version in Microsoft Word.

The Court’s issuance of a confidentiality order will constitute the determination, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), that good cause exists for the issuance of the order. However, issuance of any confidentiality order will not be given preclusive effect as a determination of good cause for Rule 26(c) purposes if, at a future time, a party or an interested member of the public moves for relief from the limitations of the confidentiality order. In the event of such a motion, the Court will engage in an appropriate assessment of the interest between privacy and public access to make a determination as to the confidentiality of the challenged document(s) in light of the facts then before the Court.

Counsel shall also review any standing order or instructions regarding protective orders from the District Court making the referral.

C.  Filing Material Under Seal: 

Please consult Local Rule 26.2 before seeking to file material under seal. With respect to documents filed electronically, that rule states that a party must (1) provisionally file the document electronically under seal; (2) file electronically at the same time a public-record version of the document with only the sealed material excluded; and (3) file a motion to seal before or simultaneously with the provisional filing and notice it for presentment promptly thereafter.

The Court will not approve the filing of entire pleadings or briefs under seal. See Pepsico, Inc.v. Redmond, 46 F.3d 29 (7th Cir. 1995) and In the Matter of Grand Jury, 983 F.2d 74 (7th Cir. 1992). If material is to be filed under seal, the motion to seal must demonstrate good cause by including a specific description of each document or category of information to be sealed and explaining why confidentiality is necessary.

D.  Use of Medical Records in Litigation: 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).

 HIPPA Sample Qualified Protective Order

The Court believes that the parties can and should work out most discovery disputes, and thus discourages the filing of discovery motions. The Court will not hear or consider any discovery motion 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 by separate certificate filed with the motion and attested to by the attorney.

Parties are reminded that compliance with Local Rule 37.2 requires a good faith effort to resolve discovery disputes through communication and negotiation. The Court believes face to face communications regarding discovery disputes are the most effective way to resolve them and requires counsel for parties to meet in person unless it is impracticable to do so. Videoconferencing satisfies this requirement. The Rule 37.2 Certificate must state that this requirement has been met or why it cannot be met with particularity. The mere exchange of correspondence (through emails, text messages, instant messaging, etc.) will not be sufficient to comply with Local Rule 37.2. Parties who fail to indicate that they have met in person to attempt to resolve their dispute risk having their motion stricken.

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 relevance and proportionality of the requested discovery. Motions to compel may be summarily stricken for a failure to comply with these rules.  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 are not allowed to file a brief in response or reply of a discovery motion without leave of Court.

The Court reminds the parties of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5), which requires the Court to award the winning side fees and costs unless the losing party’s position was substantially justified or awarding fees and costs would be unjust.

With particular respect to electronic discovery disputes, if the parties have reached an impasse regarding the discovery of 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 an 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, by telephone, or by video, and both sides should be prepared to discuss specifically the parameters of both the search(es) and the ESF.

If you are a pro se litigant (meaning you do not have a lawyer), the Court's website will provide you with additional information. Staff at the Clerk's Office (312-435-5670) or the Hibbler Memorial Pro Se Assistance Program can help you by answering questions about procedures, but they are prohibited from giving you legal advice. Help from the Clerk's Office or the Hibbler Memorial Pro Se Assistance Program is not a substitute for an attorney. You should seriously consider trying to obtain professional legal assistance. Below are lists of organizations that may be able to offer you free or low-cost legal assistance or a referral to an attorney if you can afford to pay legal services. 

• Free or low-cost _assets/_documents/_forms/_legal services
• Referral Services

Additional Resources/Information:

• Title VII and Section 1981: A Guide for Appointed Attorneys in the Northern District of Illinois
• The Americans With Disabilities Act An Age Discrimination In Employment Act: A Guide for Appointed Attorneys in the Northern District of Illinois
• Local Rule 56.2 - Notice to Pro Se Litigants Opposing Summary Judgment

Upon assignment of cases by consent or referral to Judge Berry, the Court will enter a minute order requiring the parties to file a joint status report. See Judge Berry’s Standing Order for Initial Status Report for the information to be included in the parties’ joint initial status report. Judge Berry's Standing Order for Initial Joint Status Report. [SEE BELOW, IT WILL BE LINKED AS A PDF WITH THIS CITATION]

Consistent with the scope of the consent or referral and after reviewing the joint initial status report, the Court will either set an initial status hearing or by minute order set discovery schedules, briefing schedules, and other deadlines and timetables. If the Court sets a status hearing, the lead trial counsel for each party, or an attorney with substantial familiarity with and responsibility for the case, shall appear and be prepared to discuss all aspects of the case.

A joint status report is not required in cases that are referred solely for a settlement conference, unless otherwise specifically ordered by the Court. 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE ALBERT BERRY III

219 South Dearborn Street

Chicago, Illinois

Courtroom 2214

Chambers 2206

Chicago, Illinois

(312) 435-5607

STANDING ORDER FOR INITIAL JOINT STATUS REPORTS

             This case has been assigned to Magistrate Judge Berry. By minute order the Court has set a deadline for the parties to file a joint status report. The joint status report shall contain the following information:

1.         Description of Claims and Relief Sought.

a.          Describe the claims and defenses raised by the pleadings, including the basis for federal jurisdiction.

             b.         State the relief sought, including an itemization of damages.

2.         Referral Cases.

             Describe the matter(s) referred to the magistrate judge.

3.         Discovery Schedule.

             Identify any existing discovery deadlines. If no discovery schedule exists and the case is referred for discovery supervision, the parties should confer and submit the following information:

1. The deadline for Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) disclosures.

    

2. A date to issue written discovery requests.

    

3. A fact discovery completion date. For claims involving medical conditions, fact discovery ordinarily includes treating physician depositions. The parties shall indicate whether the proposed date includes treating physician depositions. The parties need not include expert discovery dates. The Court will set expert discovery deadlines at the conclusion of fact discovery.

4.         Consideration of Issues Concerning Electronically Stored Information (“ESI”).

             State whether the parties anticipate or are engaged in ESI discovery, and, if so, what agreements have been reached regarding ESI and whether there are any areas of disagreement.

             Please note the Court has adopted the Principles of the Seventh Circuit Electronic Discovery Pilot Program and the parties should be familiar with them. In a patent case, the Court will apply the Local Patent Rules for Electronically Stored Information.

5.         Settlement.

             a.          Describe the status of any settlement discussions.

b.         State whether the parties believe a settlement conference would be productive at this time, and if not, briefly explain why.

6.         Magistrate Judge Consent.

             State whether all parties will consent to have Judge Berry conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of final judgment, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73.

7.         Pending Motions.

             Indicate the status of any pending motions.

8.         Trial.

             In consent cases, state whether a jury trial is requested, the date when the parties expect to be ready for trial, and the probable length of trial.

9.         Other Matters.

             State any other matters that should be brought to the Court’s attention for scheduling purposes.

SO ORDERED.

                                                                             ______________________________

                                                                                        Albert Berry III

                                                                                        United States Magistrate Judge

Dated: May 9, 2025

Motion hearings will be on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays at 9:30 a.m. unless otherwise scheduled by the Court. Joint, uncontested, and agreed motions must be so identified in the title and body of the motion. No courtesy copies are allowed, unless the Court specifically requests one from the parties. Parties should not file a notice of motion with any submission; the Court will order briefing or, if appropriate, schedule your motion hearing.  Monitor the public docket for information regarding hearings. Status reports will typically be by written submission.

A candid discussion between the parties prior to filing motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, and motions in limine, among others, can limit the scope of such motions or eliminate the need for them to be filed at all.

Thus, the Court will apply the meet and confer requirement not just to discovery motions, but to all motions that a party wishes to file. The requirements in Judge Berry’s standing order on discovery motions concerning what must be done to comply with the meet and confer requirement will be applied with equal force, and in the same way, with respect to all other motions.

TELEPHONIC OR REMOTE APPEARANCE:

The Court believes that motion hearings are substantive matters that require in-person participation.  As a result, telephonic or remote appearances are not allowed for motion hearings. If extraordinary circumstances exist, a party may contact the Courtroom Deputy, Yulonda Thomas, in advance to seek permission to participate by phone.

Leaner Pre-trial Orders Permitted

Judge Berry does not require the parties to prepare a full pre-trial order. Instead, Judge Berry requires only the following items be submitted before a bench or jury trial:

1. A joint and concise statement of the claim(s) of plaintiff(s), defense(s) of defendant(s), and all counterclaims and cross claims. In a jury case, this statement will be read to the jury during voir dire. This statement is due fourteen (14) days before the pre-trial conference.

2. A list of names and addresses of all witnesses: a) who will be called; b) who may be called; and c) whose deposition will be used. In a jury case, the list of names will be read to the jury during voir dire. This list is due fourteen (14) days before the trial date.

3. A list of names and addresses of all expert witnesses who will be called. This list is due fourteen (14) days before the trial date.

4. A statement summarizing the current status of settlement negotiations. This statement is due fourteen (14) days before the pre-trial conference.

5. In a bench trial, proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law are to be submitted fourteen (14) days before the trial date. Trial briefs are not necessary. The parties shall confer about proposed findings of fact and law as to which they agree and submit those to the Court. Each party also shall submit its disputed findings of fact and conclusions of law. Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law are to be in Word format, and emailed to the Proposed Order box.

6. In a jury trial, the parties are instructed to meet to discuss jury instructions prior to filing the same. The parties should concentrate their efforts on the Seventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions. Proposed jury instructions are due fourteen (14) days before the pre-trial conference, in Word format, and emailed to the Proposed Order box. Agreed and disputed instructions should be marked as such.

7. Proposed voir dire questions special to the case should be submitted to the Court fourteen (14) days before the pre-trial conference.

8. Any Daubert motions shall be filed on the docket no later than thirty-five (35) days and responses no later than twenty-one (21) days before the pre-trial conference.

9. Motions in limine shall be filed on the docket no later than twenty-one (21) days and responses no later than fourteen (14) days before the pre-trial conference. The parties should be prepared to argue their motions in limine at the pre-trial conference. Any motion in limine filed by a party must be accompanied by a statement that the party has conferred with the opposing party and has determined that the matter upon which a ruling is sought is actually in dispute – that is, that the opposing party intends to offer the evidence that the movant seeks to exclude. If the meet-and-confer process results in an agreement that certain matters are inadmissible, that agreement should be memorialized in a stipulation.

10.  Stipulations. A listing of any stipulations agreed to by the parties are to be signed and submitted at least seven (7) days before the trial date.  The Court encourages ample stipulations where possible as a good way to conserve the parties’ resources.

11.  Daily/Expedited Transcript and Real-Time Reporting.  Any requests for daily or other expedited transcripts or real-time reporting must be made at least seven (7) days prior to trial so that an available court reporter can be assigned to the trial.

Unless otherwise indicated, all submissions shall be emailed to the Court’s proposed order inbox, Proposed_Order_Berry@ilnd.uscourts.gov, with CC to counsel for all parties. The subject line of the e-mail must include the case number and name and title of the submission.

The Court will generally enter an order setting dates that adhere to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Supplemental Rules for Social Security Motions Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), typically providing that: (a) an answer must be filed within 60 days after notice of the actions is given under FRCP 3. Pursuant to Local Rule 8.1(b), the Social Security Administration's filing of the certified administrative record, in and of itself, shall suffice as the agency's answer to the complaint; (b) Plaintiff's brief in support of reversing or remanding the decision subject to review shall be filed within 30 days of the filing of the administrative record (no motion required); (c) The Social Security Administration’s motion to affirm the decision subject to review and its brief in support shall be filed within 30 days after plaintiff’s brief is filed; (d) Plaintiff’s reply brief, if any, shall be filed 14 days after defendant’s brief is filed.  Judge Berry will only grant extensions on the briefing schedule for good cause shown.

The page limit on briefs in Social Security Cases is twenty (20) pages. Briefs exceeding twenty (20) pages are discouraged and may be filed only with leave of Court.

A. Plaintiff’s Memorandum

The plaintiff shall identify the specific grounds for reversal or remand. Arguing generally that the ALJ’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence is not sufficient. The plaintiff shall include only those facts that relate to the issues presented. It is not necessary to include plaintiff’s entire medical history if it is not relevant to the issues raised. It is also not necessary to devote multiple pages to the well-recognized standards for the five-part test. Please cite a case that you believe accurately states the legal principles you wish the Court to apply and make the Court aware of relevant contrary authority.

B. The Commissioner’s Memorandum

The Commissioner is strongly encouraged (where it makes sense) to respond to the plaintiff’s assertions and arguments raised in plaintiff’s brief in the same order raised by Plaintiff. Arguing generally that the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence is not sufficient. The Commissioner’s brief may supplement the plaintiff’s facts where needed. Do not feel compelled to repeat facts included in the plaintiff’s brief. Be sure to cite to specific record evidence in support of each argument.

Submission of Proposed Orders

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 actually being given full effect. To prevent confusion, such proposed orders must be attached to an e-mail sent to the e-mail address of the assigned judge, Proposed_Order_Berry@ilnd.uscourts.gov. The subject line of the e-mail must include the case number and name, the docket number of the corresponding motion, if any, 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. 

Submitting a proposed order electronically is not a substitute for filing a motion, even if the order is agreed. A proposed order may only be submitted after the corresponding motion has been filed, unless the Court has already given prior leave to submit a proposed order without a motion.

In-Chambers Conference

Motions for summary judgment require considerable Court and attorney time, and client expense. Sometimes such motions are unnecessarily filed. A careful examination of the record prior to filing may reveal contested factual issues making the granting of the motion impossible.

In many cases after fact discovery has closed, it is helpful for the Court to hold an informal, off-the-record discussion in chambers with the lead attorneys of the parties to discuss whether the filing of a summary judgment motion is advisable given the state of the record. No written submissions should be made prior to the conference. The party who wishes to seek summary judgment should be prepared to point out the uncontested facts that support the relief being sought, and the opposing party should be prepared to speak to whether those facts are contested. This conference should be scheduled with the Courtroom Deputy before any substantive work is done preparing the summary judgment motion. No party will ever be prevented from filing a dispositive motion, but the goal of the in-chambers conference is to have a careful, informed discussion of the issues before significant time and expense have been incurred.

In some cases, the Court may determine that an in-chambers conference would not be helpful. Parties, however, should always inquire with the Court prior to filing a summary judgment motion.

Motions for Summary Judgment

The Court requires strict compliance with Local Rules 56.1(a) and 56.1(b) in the briefing of all summary judgment motions. 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 to the motion (as required by Local Rule 56.1(b)(1)-(3)) must be delivered to chambers within 24 hours of when it is filed on the CM/ECF system. 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 moving party’s 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 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.  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 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.  Curtis v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 807 F.3d 215, 218-19 (7th Cir. 2015).

In accord 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 facts 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 or deemed admitted Local Rule 56.1 statement of facts will not be accepted by the Court.  These concerns should be raised in the parties’ briefs.