Mollman v. Northland Pace Program et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Burton Mollman, 	)
) 	ORDER FOR RULE 26(f) PLANNING
Plaintiff, 	) 	MEETING AND FOR RULE 16(b)
) 	SCHEDULING CONFERENCE, AND
v. 	) 	ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY
) 	DISPUTES
Northland PACE Program; and 	)
Northland Health Care Alliance, 	)
) 	Case No. 1:25-cv-170
Defendant. 	)
IT IS ORDERED:
Rule 26(f) Meeting and Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference
The court will hold a Rule 16(b) initial pretrial scheduling/discovery conference on
March 13, 2026, at 9:30 AM CT. The scheduling conference will be held by telephone. 	To
participate in the conference, the parties shall call (571) 353-2301 and enter “Call ID”
292466149. Parties are advised that telephone conferences may be electronically recorded for the
convenience of the Court.
Counsel 	may 	use 	the 	court’s 	sample 	Scheduling/Discovery 	plan, 	available 	at
www.ndd.uscourts.gov/forms. If the court’s sample form is used, please use the form as
revised in August 2022.
Counsel must confer in person or by telephone prior to the telephone conference. As
required by Rule 26(f)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, during their conference,
counsel must:
(1) 	Discuss the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for
promptly settling or resolving the case.
(2) 	Make, or arrange to make, the initial disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1)(A).
Case 1:25-cv-00170-DLH-CRH Document 22 Filed 02/20/26 Page 1 of 4

(3) 	Discuss 	any 	issues 	about 	preserving discoverable information, including
electronically stored information. In discussing discovery of electronically stored
information, counsel shall discuss what electronic sources each party will search,
difficulty of retrieval, preservation of records, the form of production (electronic
or 	hard-copy, 	format 	of 	production, 	inclusion 	of 	metadata, 	etc.), 	cost 	of
production and which party will bear the cost, privilege/waiver issues, and any
other electronic discovery issues. Prior to counsel’s Rule 26(f)(2) conference,
counsel should determine who is most familiar with the client’s computer system,
what electronic records the client maintains, how the client’ s electronic records
are stored, the difficulty/ease of retrieving various records, the existence and
terms of the client’s document retention/destruction policy, and whether the client
has placed a “litigation hold” to prevent destruction of potentially relevant
records.
(4) 	Discuss any need for a protective order and the provisions of any desired
protective order.
(5) 	Discuss alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods and whether to request a
court-hosted settlement conference/mediation. Counsel are required to discuss the
feasibility of ADR not only between themselves but also with their respective
clients.
(6) 	Whether the parties will consent to jurisdiction of the magistrate judge.
(7) 	With a view toward securing the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of
the matter, develop a proposed discovery plan which meets the requirements of
Rule 26(f)(3).
2
Case 1:25-cv-00170-DLH-CRH Document 22 Filed 02/20/26 Page 2 of 4

No later than two business days prior to the conference, counsel shall submit their
joint proposed scheduling/discovery plan, electronically signed and dated by counsel for all
parties, 	in 	WordPerfect 	or 	Word 	format, 	to 	the 	magistrate 	judge 	at 	ndd_J-
Hochhalter@ndd.uscourts.gov. The plan shall reflect the Rule 26(f)(2) discussions and shall
include, at minimum, proposed deadlines for each of the following:
(1) 	Filing any motions to join other parties;
(2) 	Filing any motions to amend the pleadings;
(3) 	Filing any other anticipated nondispositive motions;
(4) 	Completion of fact discovery;
(5) 	Disclosure of experts and their opinions;
(6) 	Completion of expert discovery; and
(7) 	Filing any dispositive motions, with a deadline no later than March 12, 2027,
unless good cause for a later date is established at the scheduling conference.1
Any disagreements among counsel as to deadlines will be discussed at the scheduling
conference.
Counsel are encouraged to have a comprehensive discussion and are required to approach
the meeting cooperatively and in good faith. The discussion of claims and defenses should be
substantive and meaningful.
Resolution of Discovery Disputes
It is hereby ORDERED that the following steps be undertaken by all parties prior to
filing any discovery motions:
1
The dispositive motion deadline is used in assigning a trial date, which will generally be approximately six
months after the dispositive motion deadline.
3
Case 1:25-cv-00170-DLH-CRH Document 22 Filed 02/20/26 Page 3 of 4

(1) 	The parties are required to confer and fully comply with Rule 37(a)(1) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 37.1 by undertaking a sincere,
good faith effort to resolve all differences without court action or intervention.
(2) 	In the event that all parties have made reasonable, good faith efforts to confer and
attempt to resolve any differences, without success, the parties are then required
to schedule a telephonic conference with the magistrate judge in an effort to try to
resolve 	the 	discovery 	dispute 	prior 	to 	filing 	any 	discovery 	motions. 	The
magistrate judge may require the parties to submit brief position statements prior
to the telephonic conference.
(3) 	If the discovery dispute is not resolved during the telephonic conference with the
magistrate judge, the magistrate judge may permit filing of discovery motions. In
connection with the filing of any such motions, the moving party must fully
comply with all requirements of Rule 37(a)(1) and Local Rule 37.1 and must
submit the certifications required by those rules.
(4) 	The court will not hear any discovery motion unless the parties have made a
sincere, good faith effort to resolve the dispute and all of the above-described
steps have been strictly followed. A failure to fully comply with all of the
prerequisite steps may result in a denial of any motion with prejudice and may
result in an award of costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.
Dated this 20th day of February, 2026.
/s/ Clare R. Hochhalter
Clare R. Hochhalter, Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
4
Case 1:25-cv-00170-DLH-CRH Document 22 Filed 02/20/26 Page 4 of 4