A Blog About Intellectual Property Litigation and the District of Delaware


Entries for tag: Non-Dispositive

Worst place I've seen for a meet-and-confer? The courtroom, during a break in a trial -- when a juror from the trial wandered in.
Worst place I've seen for a meet-and-confer? The courtroom, during a break in a trial -- when a juror from the trial wandered in. AI-Generated, displayed with permission

Delaware's Local Rule 7.1.1 requires, in cases that don't involve pro se parties, that the parties must have a verbal meet-and-confer before either party files a non-dispositive motion:

Except for civil cases involving pro se parties or motions brought by nonparties, every nondispositive motion shall be accompanied by an averment of counsel for the moving party that a reasonable effort has been made to reach agreement with the opposing party on the matters set forth in the motion. Unless otherwise ordered, failure to so aver may result in dismissal of the motion. …

Is the non-dispositive ruling in your case really special enough to warrant objections?
Is the non-dispositive ruling in your case really special enough to warrant objections? AI Generated, displayed with permission

Unlike with R&Rs on dispositive matters, the magistrate judges do not typically flag the deadline for objections to non-dispositive orders. No surprise, then, that attorneys sometimes seem to forget that parties can object to even non-dispositive rulings by magistrate judges under FRCP 72(a). Yesterday Judge Williams overruled such an objection to a non-dispositive order by Magistrate Judge Burke.

As Nate discussed last month, Judge Burke had granted a motion to strike a late-disclosed disclosure-dedication argument, because the party making the argument had never disclosed it in response to a contention interrogatory, and instead (apparently) held it until the summary judgment stage.

Judge …