Standing Order - Courtroom Opportunities for Relatively Inexperienced Attorneys; Standing Order - Default Standing Order; Standing Order - Appearance Of Counsel Via Telephone and/or Video; Standing Order - In-Person Proceedings; Form Of Default Judgment; Scheduling Order; Standing Order Re Courtroom

=== Standing Order - Courtroom Opportunities for Relatively Inexperienced Attorneys ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS STANDING ORDER REGARDING COURTROOM OPPORTUNITIES FOR RELATIVELY INEXPERIENCED ATTORNEYS CASPER, J. May 16, 2011 In May 2005, Judge F. Dennis Saylor (and then Magistrate Judge Charles B. Swartwood), sitting in the Central Division (Worcester) of this Court, adopted a standing order “strongly encourag[ing] the participation of relatively inexperienced attorneys in all court proceedings.” As the Court explained at the time, the standing order was prompted by the recognition that the “[c]ourtroom opportunities for relatively inexperienced attorneys, particularly those who practice at larger firms, have declined precipitously across the nation in recent years.” This standing order remains in place in the Central Division for appearances before Judge Saylor and Magistrate Judge Timothy S. Hillman and anecdotal information indicates that the order has had the desired effect of having more well prepared junior attorneys attend status conferences, argue motions to the Court, and, under appropriate supervision, examine witnesses at trial. The decline in courtroom opportunities for newer lawyers is widely recognized and is one of concern to both the bench and bar. A Task Force of the Boston Bar Association acknowledged as much in its report, “Jury Trial Trends in Massachusetts: The Need to Ensure Jury Trial Competency Among Practicing Attorneys as a Result of the Vanishing Jury Trial Phenomenon,” issued in 2006. As a result of its year-long work exploring the statistical and anecdotal evidence regarding the rate of jury trials over time, the Task Force concluded that “the ‘vanishing jury trial’ is actually affecting the jury trial experience of current and future generations of practitioners” and 1 made recommendations to courts, lawyers and clients to remedy this issue. Among its recommendations to the judiciary, the Task Force called upon “judges presiding over pre-trial conferences and related matters to identify and encourage opportunities for a junior attorney to participate in the examination of witnesses or other significant trial work.” To take up this call and attempt, in some small measure, to remedy the dearth of courtroom opportunities for newer attorneys, the undersigned judge issues this standing order, substantially similar in purpose and intent to the order previously adopted by the Central Division. Accordingly, the undersigned judge, as a matter of policy, strongly encourages the participation of relatively inexperienced attorneys in all court proceedings including but not limited to initial scheduling conferences, status conferences, hearings on discovery motions and dispositive motions, and examination of witnesses at trial. That said, a number of important caveats regarding professional standards, authority and supervision apply to this policy. 1. First and foremost, all attorneys who appear in this session will be held to the highest professional standards. This includes relatively inexperienced attorneys with regard to knowledge of the case, overall preparedness, candor to the court and any other matter as to which experience is largely irrelevant. All attorneys who appear in court are expected to be thoroughly versed in the factual record of the case and the applicable law that governs. 2. All attorneys appearing in court should have a degree of authority commensurate with the proceeding. For example, an attorney appearing at an initial scheduling conference or status conference should have the authority to commit his/her party to a discovery and motion schedule and address any other matters likely to arise including but not limited the client’s willingness to be referred to mediation. 2 3. Relatively inexperienced attorneys who seek to participate in evidentiary hearings of substantial complexity (e.g., examining a witness at trial), should be accompanied and supervised by a more experienced attorney unless counsel seeks and receives leave of Court to do otherwise. The undersigned judge understands and appreciates that this standing order is not self- executing. If it is to have the desired effect of countering the trend of declining courtroom opportunities for relatively inexperienced attorneys, it is their more experienced, supervising colleagues who must effectuate the policy articulated in this standing order. The Court hopes that, for appropriate matters, they will do so and it encourages counsel to seek additional guidance from the Court in particular cases concerning the scope and application of this policy. So ordered. /s/ Denise J. Casper United States District Judge 3

=== Standing Order - Default Standing Order ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Plaintiff(s) v. Civil Action Defendant(s) STANDING ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT Casper, J. A Notice of Default has been issued to the above named defendant(s) upon request of the plaintiff(s) in the above captioned action. In anticipation of a Motion for Entry of Default Judgment being filed, counsel are advised of the following requirements for submission of such motion in order to ensure compliance with Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: 1. A party making a motion for default judgment shall comply with all the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 55 particularly those related to the filing of affidavits. The moving party shall also submit an appropriate form of default judgment in the fashion of the draft order attached hereto as Appendix A. The proposed order should be filed with the motion for default judgment. 2. Within 14 days after the filing of the motion and proposed order by the moving party, the party against whom default judgment is sought shall have an opportunity to file substantiated opposition to the default judgment motion and to request a hearing thereon. 3. Necessary and appropriate action with respect to this Standing ORDER shall be taken by the moving party within 30 days of the date of the issuance of this ORDER. If for any reason the moving party cannot take necessary and appropriate action, that party shall file an affidavit describing the status of this case and show good cause why necessary and appropriate action with respect to this Standing ORDER cannot be taken in a timely fashion and further why this case should remain on the docket. Failure to comply with this paragraph will result in the entry of dismissal of the moving party's claims for want of prosecution. By the Court, Dated: /s/ Deputy Clerk 2

=== Standing Order - Appearance Of Counsel Via Telephone and/or Video ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS SECOND REVISED STANDING ORDER REGARDING APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL VIA TELEPHONE OR VIDEOCONFERENCE CASPER, J. August 31, 2022 The Court notes that during any telephonic and/or video proceedings, it is important that all participants, including counsel, endeavor to ensure that an accurate record of the proceedings is maintained as all such proceedings are being transcribed by the court reporter. In furtherance of that interest, the Court adopts the following requirements as to videoconferences: 1. Use the mute function if you are not speaking. 2. If the videoconference is through Zoom, please use both the video and audio features. If you will not have access to a computer/laptop/phone with a camera to use the video feature on Zoom, please contact Lisa Hourihan, the courtroom deputy in advance of the proceeding. 3. If the videoconference is through Zoom, please ensure that your device will identify you by first name and last name on the screen (not by initials or phone number). 4. Please remember to speak slowly and clearly. As to telephonic appearances, requirements one and four above apply along with the following requirements: 5. To the extent that counsel can call on a land line, please do so. It greatly enhances the quality of the transmission. 6. Please do not use the speaker function on your phone. 7. Please do not enable or use a voice activated system. 8. While on the phone, it is particularly important that counsel not speak over other participants. Please pause before speaking so you do not risk doing so. 9. Before speaking, identify yourself again for the record. The Court also reminds counsel, and all participants to any proceedings, of the prohibition against any recording or broadcast of court proceeding under Local Rule 83.3(a) (and, in criminal cases, under Fed. R. Crim. 53). This Order replaces and supersedes the Court’s Standing Order of April 3, 2020. So Ordered. /s/ Denise J. Casper Denise J. Casper United States District Judge

=== Standing Order - In-Person Proceedings ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS STANDING ORDER REGARDING IN-PERSON PROCEEDINGS CASPER, J. July 27, 2020 In light of the issuance of General Order 20-31 (Supplemental Order Concerning Certain Non-Jury Proceeding), dated July 15, 2020, which noted that the Court “will begin to conduct a limited number of in-person, non-jury proceedings while providing reasonable protection to the health and safety of the participants,” id., the Court adopts the following provisions and recommendations to counsel: 1. All attorneys should review General Order 20-31; 2. As provided in General Order 20-31, most proceedings will continue to be conducted by video. The limited number of proceedings that will proceed in-person will be noticed as such on CM/ECF system; 3. If a matter is proceeding in-person, all participants who attend in person (including attorneys, witnesses, parties or members of the general public) shall conduct a health self-assessment, a link to which appears in General Order 20-31; 4. No one should come to the Courthouse if they have tested positive for COVID-19 or are experiencing any of the coronavirus-related symptoms identified in the health self- assessment. If any attorney or any necessary participant has tested positive or are experiencing any such symptoms, they should notify, Lisa Hourihan, the courtroom clerk for this session as soon as possible; 5. In-person proceedings will only be proceeding in one of four designated courtrooms (Courtrooms 1, 9, 18 or 19) which have been reconfigured, outfitted with plexiglass and maintenance of social distancing. Please be aware of the courtroom assignment which will be listed with the hearing notice on CM/ECF system; 6. All participants shall wear face masks in the courtroom (including attorneys), except a witness during his or her testimony. A witness shall wear his/her mask to/from the witness stand and otherwise while he/she is in the courtroom before/after his/her testimony. 7. Although counsel is free to wear a face mask of his/her choosing, the Court suggests that counsel with a speaking role may want to wear a disposable, paper surgical mask (as experience in the courtroom shows that counsel are audible when wearing this type of mask and the courtroom will have some available); 8. There will be no shared equipment in the courtroom. Accordingly, there is a document camera on each counsel table and outlets for plugging laptops into the Court’s document display system. If possible, counsel should plan to use electronic copies of exhibits (and proposed exhibits) during the proceeding or discuss the use of paper documents during the pre-hearing video conference with the Court noted below. 9. Counsel will make their arguments and examinations from counsel table. Only one counsel per side may be at counsel table (along with a criminal defendant in criminal cases). 10. Space is at a premium in the courtroom. Other members of the legal team or party representatives may sit in the gallery (there is an extra table in the gallery for one additional legal team member per side). If sitting in the benches in the gallery, participants may only sit at the designated ends of each bench. 11. To allow additional public access, any proceeding going forward in person will also be available via video conference. The same notice regarding video access will be listed on CM/ECF for those interested in viewing the proceedings. 12. To allow confidential communication between defense counsel and a criminal defendant at a social distance, the Court has installed a headset/microphone system that will allow counsel, defendant (and/or interpreter) to communicate, if necessary, during the proceeding. Disposable earbuds will be available in the courtroom, but if counsel/interpreter prefer to bring their own, they may do. Such headphones must have a jack to plug into the microphone pack (no Bluetooth, AirPods, etc.) 13. The same headset/microphone system is available for the Court and counsel to use for sidebar conferences without the necessity of moving to sidebar and allowing for social distance. For this reason, counsel on both sides may choose to bring their own headphones and follow the guidance above regarding same. 14. Since there are no carafes/cups in the courtroom, counsel may want to bring his/her own water bottle. 15. At the end of the proceeding (or, for a witness, at the end of his/her testimony), all participants (including counsel) shall wipe down the surface of table where they have been sitting/standing, shall remove all personal items (including water bottles) from the courtroom and shall remove and throw away the microphone cover/baggie from the microphone that they have been using. Wipes, hand sanitizers and trash barrels have been added to the courtrooms for this purpose. 16. As counsel may be aware, Governor Baker has adopted new travel orders, effective August 1, 2020, (with certain exceptions), www.mass.gov/MAtraveler. If participants (e.g., out-of-state witnesses or counsel) are involved in the proceeding, you may need to consult these provisions and advise the Court as soon as possible if it will affect the availability of necessary participants. to Massachusetts for visitors 17. As these provisions and the setup of the courtroom are new to the bar, the Court will likely conduct a Zoom conference with counsel before the in-court proceeding to review these provisions. Counsel is also free to contact Lisa Hourihan with any questions. So Ordered. /s/ Denise J. Casper Denise J. Casper United States District Judge

=== Form Of Default Judgment ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ________________________________ Plaintiff(s) v. Civil Action No. ___________________ ________________________________ Defendant(s) FORM OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT CASPER, J. Date: _______________________ Defendant __________________________ having failed to plead or otherwise defend in this action and its default having been entered, Now, upon application of plaintiff and affidavits demonstrating that defendant owes plaintiff the sum of $__________________________ that defendant is not an infant or incompetent person or in the military service of the United States, and that the plaintiff has incurred costs in the sum of $________________________. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that plaintiff recover from defendant _____________________ the principal amount of $________________________, with costs in the amount of $__________________________and prejudgment interest at the rate of ________% from ________________ to ______________ in the amount of $____________________ for a total judgment of $______________________ with interest as provided by law. By the Court, ________________________________ Deputy Clerk NOTE: The post judgment interest rate effective this date is _________%.

=== Scheduling Order ===

Case: Casper, D.J. Scheduling Order This Scheduling Order is intended primarily to provide a reasonable timetable for discovery and motion practice and to ensure the fair and just resolution of this matter, either by settlement or trial, without undue delay or expense. Having conducted a Scheduling Conference between the parties pursuant to Local Rule 16.1(a), it is hereby ORDERED pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 16.1(f) that: 1. Initial Disclosures. Initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) must be completed by _________. 2. Amendments to Pleadings. Except for good cause shown, no motions seeking leave to add new parties or to amend the pleadings to assert new claims or defenses may be filed after _______. 3. Fact Discovery. a. Final Deadline. All discovery, other than expert discovery, must be completed by __________. 4. Status Conference. A status conference will be held on _________ at ____ in Courtroom 11. 5. Expert Discovery. a. Plaintiff(s)’ trial experts must be designated and the information required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) must be disclosed by ____________. b. Defendant(s)’ trial experts must be designated and the information required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) must be disclosed by _____________. c. All trial experts must be deposed by _______. 6. Summary Judgment Motions. a. Motions for summary judgment must be filed by ______. b. Opposition to summary judgment motions must be filed within 21 days after service of the motion pursuant to Local Rule 7.1. c. All summary judgment filings shall conform to the requirements of Local Rule 56.1. 7. Initial Pretrial Conference. An initial pretrial conference shall be held on _____ at ____ in Courtroom 11. The parties shall confer regarding the topics identified under Local Rule 16.5(d) and shall prepare and submit a joint pretrial memorandum in accordance with Local Rule 16.5(d) no later than five (5) business days prior to the pretrial conference. The pretrial memorandum shall also propose deadlines for the filing of motions in limine, proposed jury instructions and proposed jury voir dire.

=== Standing Order Re Courtroom Opportunities ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS STANDING ORDER REGARDING COURTROOM OPPORTUNITIES FOR RELATIVELY INEXPERIENCED ATTORNEYS CASPER, J. May 16, 2011 In May 2005, Judge F. Dennis Saylor (and then Magistrate Judge Charles B. Swartwood), sitting in the Central Division (Worcester) of this Court, adopted a standing order “strongly encourag[ing] the participation of relatively inexperienced attorneys in all court proceedings.” As the Court explained at the time, the standing order was prompted by the recognition that the “[c]ourtroom opportunities for relatively inexperienced attorneys, particularly those who practice at larger firms, have declined precipitously across the nation in recent years.” This standing order remains in place in the Central Division for appearances before Judge Saylor and Magistrate Judge Timothy S. Hillman and anecdotal information indicates that the order has had the desired effect of having more well prepared junior attorneys attend status conferences, argue motions to the Court, and, under appropriate supervision, examine witnesses at trial. The decline in courtroom opportunities for newer lawyers is widely recognized and is one of concern to both the bench and bar. A Task Force of the Boston Bar Association acknowledged as much in its report, “Jury Trial Trends in Massachusetts: The Need to Ensure Jury Trial Competency Among Practicing Attorneys as a Result of the Vanishing Jury Trial Phenomenon,” issued in 2006. As a result of its year-long work exploring the statistical and anecdotal evidence regarding the rate of jury trials over time, the Task Force concluded that “the ‘vanishing jury trial’ is actually affecting the jury trial experience of current and future generations of practitioners” and 1 made recommendations to courts, lawyers and clients to remedy this issue. Among its recommendations to the judiciary, the Task Force called upon “judges presiding over pre-trial conferences and related matters to identify and encourage opportunities for a junior attorney to participate in the examination of witnesses or other significant trial work.” To take up this call and attempt, in some small measure, to remedy the dearth of courtroom opportunities for newer attorneys, the undersigned judge issues this standing order, substantially similar in purpose and intent to the order previously adopted by the Central Division. Accordingly, the undersigned judge, as a matter of policy, strongly encourages the participation of relatively inexperienced attorneys in all court proceedings including but not limited to initial scheduling conferences, status conferences, hearings on discovery motions and dispositive motions, and examination of witnesses at trial. That said, a number of important caveats regarding professional standards, authority and supervision apply to this policy. 1. First and foremost, all attorneys who appear in this session will be held to the highest professional standards. This includes relatively inexperienced attorneys with regard to knowledge of the case, overall preparedness, candor to the court and any other matter as to which experience is largely irrelevant. All attorneys who appear in court are expected to be thoroughly versed in the factual record of the case and the applicable law that governs. 2. All attorneys appearing in court should have a degree of authority commensurate with the proceeding. For example, an attorney appearing at an initial scheduling conference or status conference should have the authority to commit his/her party to a discovery and motion schedule and address any other matters likely to arise including but not limited the client’s willingness to be referred to mediation. 2 3. Relatively inexperienced attorneys who seek to participate in evidentiary hearings of substantial complexity (e.g., examining a witness at trial), should be accompanied and supervised by a more experienced attorney unless counsel seeks and receives leave of Court to do otherwise. The undersigned judge understands and appreciates that this standing order is not self- executing. If it is to have the desired effect of countering the trend of declining courtroom opportunities for relatively inexperienced attorneys, it is their more experienced, supervising colleagues who must effectuate the policy articulated in this standing order. The Court hopes that, for appropriate matters, they will do so and it encourages counsel to seek additional guidance from the Court in particular cases concerning the scope and application of this policy. So ordered. /s/ Denise J. Casper United States District Judge 3