Full text
89739658v.2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
TYLER ADAMS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
MASS GENERAL BRIGHAM
INCORPORATED,
Defendant.
Civil Action No. 1:21-cv-11686-FDS
JOINT STATUS REPORT REGARDING PROPOSED SUMMARY JUDGMENT
PROCEDURES AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE
In advance of the status conference scheduled for December 5, 2022, the Parties1 hereby
report that they have reached agreement regarding a proposed briefing schedule, submission
format, and procedures in connection with Defendant’s forthcoming Motion for Summary
Judgment. The Parties set forth their agreed proposals below and ask that the Court enter the
Parties’ proposal as an Order of the Court.
I.
Proposed Briefing Schedule
Per this Court’s order entered on July 19, 2022, see ECF No. 109, dispositive motions are
due to be filed on or before March 21, 2023. To facilitate a fulsome presentation to the Court,
the Parties propose the following briefing schedule:
•
Defendant’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 motion to be filed on or before March 21, 2023;
1 Defendant and the represented Plaintiffs state that a draft copy of this status report was provided to pro se Plaintiff
Dr. James Wines on December 1, 2022 by email. Dr. Wines responded by email that same day, writing: “Thank you
for your efforts. Unfortunately, to date I have received little, if any, substantive discovery materials from MGB and I
do not agree with the proposed Joint Status Report.” Counsel for Defendant responded, writing: “Thanks for letting
us know. We will indicate that you do not agree to the joint report. MGB has produced much discovery to you, but
that’s not relevant to this particular joint status report which concerns summary judgment.”
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 136 Filed 12/02/22 Page 1 of 5
2
89739658v.2
•
Plaintiffs’ opposition to be filed within 30 days of service of any Rule 56 motion;
and,
•
Defendant’s reply brief, if any, to be filed within 21 days of service of the
opposition. Defendant may file a reply without seeking leave of court.
II.
Page Limits and Record Appendix
a. Page Limits
The Parties propose that the memoranda of law in support of Defendant’s opening brief,
and Plaintiffs’ opposition thereto, shall each be limited to forty (40) pages in length, and that the
length of Defendant’s reply memorandum be no more than twenty-five (25) pages.
b. Record Appendix
In view of the voluminous evidentiary record in this case, the Parties agree that their
presentations, and the Court’s review, will be aided by a departure from the procedure
contemplated by Local Rule 56.1. Specifically, the Parties propose that, rather than submitting
separate sets of exhibits, they will cooperate in the preparation of a consecutively-paginated joint
record appendix (the “Joint Appendix”) similar to that required by Fed. R. App. P. 30.
Defendant agrees to bear the clerical responsibility of compiling the Joint Appendix in the first
instance, and shall serve on Plaintiff – but not file – a proposed Joint Appendix on the same date
as the filing and service of its Motion for Summary Judgment.
On the same date on which they serve and file their Opposition, Plaintiffs shall serve on
Defendant – but not file – any additional portions of the record not included in the initial
proposed Joint Appendix that they wish to include. Plaintiffs shall continue the consecutive
pagination of the proposed Joint Appendix in their designations. Defendant shall incorporate
Plaintiffs’ designated additions to the Joint Appendix into the final document to be filed with the
Court. On or before the deadline for filing its reply brief, Defendant shall file the Joint
Appendix. The Parties shall work cooperatively in preparing the Joint Appendix.
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 136 Filed 12/02/22 Page 2 of 5
3
89739658v.2
The Joint Appendix shall include an index describing each document or part of the record
included therein.
c. Statements of Material Facts
The Parties shall cite to the Joint Appendix in their respective statements of material
facts.
III.
Filing of Documents Designated Under Protective Orders
To the extent the Joint Appendix, or any other paper submitted in connection with the
Parties’ summary judgment briefing, includes documents or deposition testimony that are subject
to, or have been designated under, the protective orders in effect in this action, see ECF Nos. 60,
67, and 69 (the “Protective Orders”), the Parties shall proceed as follows.
1. The Parties shall exclude any exhibits or documents (or redact any portion thereof)
that are subject to the Protective Orders from their initial summary judgment filings. Any such
excluded or redacted materials may be indicated in the publicly-filed summary judgment papers
with the words “SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER.” In order to protect the identities of
those who reviewed exemption requests for MGB and who were deposed in this matter, in
compliance with the Court’s Protective Order (Docket No. 60), the Parties shall refer to the
reviewer deponents in the briefing by pseudonyms (e.g., Religious Exemption Reviewers No. 1,
2, etc.) and file under seal a key to those pseudonyms.
2. On or before the date of filing of the Joint Appendix, the Parties shall submit motions
to file under seal any exhibits or documents, or parts thereof, that are subject to the Protective
Orders.
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 136 Filed 12/02/22 Page 3 of 5
4
89739658v.2
3. Following this Court’s ruling on any motions to seal, the Parties shall comply with the
Court’s Instructions for Submitting Sealed Filings Using the Electronic Drop Box (last updated
March 29, 2021).
IV.
Oral Argument
The Parties agree that oral argument will further the Court’s consideration of Defendant’s
Motion for Summary Judgment, and consequently the Parties jointly request oral argument in
connection with that motion.
Dated: December 2, 2022
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/_Ryan P. McLane______________
Ryan P. McLane (BBO# 697464)
Lauren Bradford (BBO# 700084)
McLane & McLane, LLC
269 South Westfield Street
Feeding Hills, MA 01030
ryan@mclanelaw.com
lauren@mclanelaw.com
TEL: (413) 789-7771
FAX: (413) 789-7731
COUNSEL FOR THE
REPRESENTED PLAINTIFFS
/s/ Dawn R. Solowey
Lynn A. Kappelman (BBO# 642017)
Katherine E. Perrelli (BBO# 549820)
Kristin McGurn (BBO# 559687)
Dawn Reddy Solowey (BBO# 567757)
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
Seaport East
Two Seaport Lane, Suite 1200
Boston, MA 02210-2028
kperrelli@seyfarth.com
lkappelman@seyfarth.com
kmcgurn@seyfarth.com
dsolowey@seyfarth.com
TEL: (617) 946-4800
FAX: (617) 946-4801
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 136 Filed 12/02/22 Page 4 of 5
5
89739658v.2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that this document filed through the CM/ECF system will be sent
electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)
and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non-registered participants on December 2,
2022.
/s/ Dawn R. Solowey
Dawn R. Solowey
Case 1:21-cv-11686-FDS Document 136 Filed 12/02/22 Page 5 of 5