Report of Parties’ Planning Meeting

Summary

Report of Parties' Planning Meeting in Ryan Klaassen, Jaime Carini and other plaintiffs v. The Trustees of Indiana University, Civ. No. 1:21-cv-238-DRL-SLC, United States District Court Northern District of Indiana, filed 09/23/21 as document 47. The report says the parties met for a planning meeting on September 3, 2021, and agreed to the report on September 23, 2021. It records disagreements on pre-discovery disclosures, the entering date for the case management plan, electronically stored information, and discovery deadlines, with Plaintiffs proposing 270 days to complete all discovery and Defendant proposing 200 days. The parties agree on a maximum of 25 interrogatories by each side and a limit of 7 hours per deposition. The report states that the parties' settlement prospects will not be enhanced by ADR.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

US.134671740.05

1
United States District Court
Northern District of Indiana

Ryan Klaassen, Jaime Carini, Daniel J.
Baumgartner, Ashlee Morris, Seth Crowder,
Macey Policka, Margaret Roth, and Natalie
Sperazza,

Plaintiffs,

v.

The Trustees of Indiana University,

Defendant.

Civ. No.    1:21-cv-238-DRL-SLC

Report of Parties’ Planning Meeting

1.
The parties held a planning meeting under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) on September 3, 2021,
and agreed to this report on September 23, 2021. Courtney Turner Milbank and Melena S.
Siebert participated for the Plaintiffs, and Anne K. Ricchiuto participated for the Defendant.
2.
Jurisdiction.

The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343(a) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201
and 2202. The parties agree that the constitutional questions of whether IU has violated the
Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment rights satisfies the federal question requirement to support this
Court’s subject matter jurisdiction over this case.
USDC IN/ND case 1:21-cv-00238-DRL-SLC   document 47   filed 09/23/21   page 1 of 7

2
3.
Pre-Discovery Disclosures.
The parties disagree on pre-discovery disclosures. Each party’s proposal follows:
Plaintiffs’ Proposed Pre-Discovery Disclosures
X       The parties will exchange, but may not file, Rule 26(a)(1) information by 14 days from
when Plaintiffs’ Motion to Stay [ECF No. 46] is lifted or denied, pursuant to this Court’s rules
regarding calculation of time.
Defendant’s Proposed Pre-Discovery Disclosures
X       The parties will exchange, but may not file, Rule 26(a)(1) information by October 19.
4.
Discovery Plan.
a. The parties disagree upon the entering date for the case management plan.
i. Plaintiffs propose that the case management plan should not be entered until
Plaintiffs’ motion to stay proceedings is lifted or denied. All deadlines in this report
that relate to the case management plan assume that it will not be entered until the
Plaintiff’s motion to stay proceedings is lifted or denied.
ii. IU requests that Court enter the Report of Parties’ Planning Meeting at the conclusion
of the parties’ initial pretrial conference and that the parties’ case management
deadlines begin to run at that time.
b. Despite the parties’ disagreement on the timing of the case management plan, each party
agrees to the subject descriptions pertaining to discovery described below.
i. Plaintiffs:  Plaintiffs will seek discovery or supplementation of previous discovery on
at least the following subjects:
USDC IN/ND case 1:21-cv-00238-DRL-SLC   document 47   filed 09/23/21   page 2 of 7

3
• Defendant’s implementation and enforcement of its COVID-related Mandate,
including, but not limited to, its policies regarding: COVID testing,
quarantining, masking, and other requirements or policies Defendant has put
into place.
• The number of COVID infections in the IU student population, the number of
deaths caused by COVID in the IU student population, the number of
hospitalizations caused by COVID in the IU student population, as well as the
same numbers for sickness, deaths, and hospitalizations in the IU student
population from non-COVID causes.
• Number of vaccinated students who subsequently contracted COVID.
• Contract tracing data of transmission from an unvaccinated student to a
vaccinated student and vice versa.
• Any extension, continuance, or modification of Defendant’s Mandate.
• Defendant’s decision to add an ethical exemption and the details regarding the
implementation and review process for the same.
• The number of IU students exempted from COVID vaccination.
• Defendant’s denial of exemption requests.
• Meetings of Defendant’s Restart Committee.
ii. Defendant: Discovery will be needed on at least the following subjects:

• Plaintiffs’ experience with and adherence to IU’s COVID-19 policies
• Plaintiffs’ enrollment status and plans
• Dr. Peter McCullough’s opinions and qualifications
c. Parties disagree as to how the disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information
should be handled. Alternative proposals for ESI follow:
i. Plaintiffs’ ESI Proposal:  The parties agree to consult with one another regarding
ESI, but generally agree that providing the applicable, searchable PDF files to the
other party is sufficient.
ii. Defendant’s ESI Proposal:  The parties agree that all electronically stored
information shall be produced in Bates numbered TIFF (or, if not possible, in .PDF)
images with a metadata load file, organized by family (to the extent possible) with the
USDC IN/ND case 1:21-cv-00238-DRL-SLC   document 47   filed 09/23/21   page 3 of 7

4
following metadata fields:  BegDoc, EndDoc, BegAttach, EndAttach, FileName,
Title, Author, CreateDate, CreateTime, LastModDate, LastModTime, SentDate,
SentTime, RecdDate, RecdTime, From, To, CC, BCC, Em_Subject, FileSize,
FilePath, FileType, NativeFilePath, and Custodian, unless otherwise agreed to by the
parties or ordered by the Court.
d. The parties disagree as to the timing of discovery deadlines. Each party’s proposed
deadlines follow:
i. Plaintiffs’ Proposed Discovery Deadlines:
a. The last date to complete all discovery is 270 days from when the case
management plan is entered by this Court.
b. The last date to complete all discovery related to Plaintiff’s expert witnesses is
180 days from when the case management plan is entered by this Court.
c. The last date to complete all discovery related to Defendant’s expert witnesses is
240 days from when the case management plan is entered by this Court.
d. Supplementation of discovery for all parties is required within 10 days of when
the new information is acquired.
ii. Defendant’s Proposed Discovery Deadlines:
a. The last date to complete all discovery is 200 days from when the case
management plan is entered by this Court.
b. The last date to complete all discovery related to Plaintiff’s expert witnesses is
130 days from when the case management plan is entered by this Court.
USDC IN/ND case 1:21-cv-00238-DRL-SLC   document 47   filed 09/23/21   page 4 of 7

5
c. The last date to complete all discovery related to Defendant’s expert witnesses is
160 days from when the case management plan is entered by this Court.
d. Supplementation of discovery for all parties is required within 30 days of when
the new information is acquired.
e. The parties agree on the following limitations for discovery:
i. Maximum of 25 interrogatories by each side.
iii. Maximum of 25 requests for admission by each side.
iv. Maximum of 8 depositions by Plaintiffs and 8 by Defendant, excluding depositions
taken for purposes of the preliminary injunction proceedings.
v. Each deposition is limited to a maximum of 7 hours unless extended by stipulation.
f. The parties disagree upon the disclosures related to Rule 26(a)(2) witnesses. Each party’s
proposal follows:
i.  Plaintiffs’ Proposal:  The parties must disclose the identity of any Rule 26(a)(2)
witness and the witness’s written report (if applicable) by:
a.
150 days from when the case management plan is entered by this Court for
Plaintiffs;
b.
210 days from when the case management plan is entered by this Court for
Defendant; and
c.
within 10 days of when the new information is acquired for Rule 26(e)
supplements.
ii.  Defendants’ Proposal:  The parties must disclose the identity of any Rule 26(a)(2)
USDC IN/ND case 1:21-cv-00238-DRL-SLC   document 47   filed 09/23/21   page 5 of 7

6
witness and the witness’s written report (if applicable) by:
a.
45 days from when the case management plan is entered by this Court for
Plaintiffs;
b.
75 days from when the case management plan is entered by this Court for
Defendant; and
c.
within 14 days of when the new information is acquired for Rule 26(e)
supplements.
5.  Other Items.
a. The last date either party may seek permission to join additional parties and to amend the
pleadings is 30 days from when the case management plan is entered by this Court.
b. The time to file dispositive motions and Rule 26(a)(3) pretrial disclosures will be
governed by separate order.
c. The case should be ready for bench trial by 270 days following the conclusion of
discovery and at this time is expected to take between 3-5 days.
d. At this time, all parties do not consent to refer this matter to the currently assigned
Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73 for all further
proceedings including trial and entry of judgment.
6.  Alternative Dispute Resolution.
The parties’ settlement prospects will not be enhanced by ADR.

USDC IN/ND case 1:21-cv-00238-DRL-SLC   document 47   filed 09/23/21   page 6 of 7

7
Dated: September 23, 2021
Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ James Bopp, Jr.
James Bopp, Jr., Ind. Bar No. 2838-84
Richard E. Coleson, Ind. Bar No. 11527-70
Courtney Milbank, Ind. Bar No. 32178-29
Melena S. Siebert, Ind. Bar No. 35061-15
THE BOPP LAW FIRM
1 South 6th Street
Terre Haute, Indiana 47807
Telephone: (812) 232-2434
Facsimile: (812) 235-3685
jboppjr@aol.com
rcoleson@bopplaw.com
cmilbank@bopplaw.com
msiebert@bopplaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiffs

FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP

/s/ Anne K. Ricchiuto
Anne K. Ricchiuto (Ind. Bar No. 25760-49)
Stephanie L. Gutwein (Ind. Bar No. 31234-49)
300 North Meridian Street, Suite 2500
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 237-0300
Fax: (317) 237-1000
anne.ricchiuto@faegredrinker.com
stephanie.gutwein@faegredrinker.com
Attorneys for Defendant Trustees of Indiana
University

USDC IN/ND case 1:21-cv-00238-DRL-SLC   document 47   filed 09/23/21   page 7 of 7

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.innd.107499.47.0.pdf

Size

152,253 bytes

SHA-256

c30695baf63d7e1112d3d00bab451a6957f18dd04a8a28c506f3dc9ab5a74af8

Our copy

gov.uscourts.innd.107499.47.0.pdf

Original

archive.org