ADVERSARY PROCEEDINGS - PROCEDURES

(a) General. This rule applies to all adversary proceedings and, if ordered by the Court, to contested matters. To the extent that the time periods set forth in this rule conflict with those set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, or other Local Rules, this rule controls. (b) Injunctive Relief.

If a pleading or other paper filed with the Court contains a request for injunctive relief pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7065, the title of the pleading or paper must include the words “Injunctive Relief Sought” or the equivalent. (c) Service. Plaintiff must serve the summons issued by the Clerk, the complaint, and a copy of this rule within seven days after the summons is issued as required by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7004(e). If the initial summons and accompanying papers are not timely served, plaintiff must promptly request the issuance of an alias summons and serve the alias summons together with the complaint and a copy of this rule.

Plaintiff must serve all defendants no later than 28 days after the complaint is filed. If an additional party is thereafter named as a plaintiff or a defendant, plaintiff must serve a copy of this rule on each additional party within seven days of the date that the additional party is named. (d) Proof of Service. Plaintiff must promptly file a proof of service indicating the service of each summons, the complaint, and this rule on each defendant.

(e) Failure to Effect Service. If plaintiff does not complete timely and effective service of the summons and complaint, the Court may dismiss the adversary proceeding for lack of prosecution without further notice or hearing. If plaintiff requires additional time to effect service, plaintiff must file a motion for extension of time. (f) Defaults.

If a defendant has not filed a timely response, plaintiff must seek entry of a Clerk’s default of that defendant and move for judgment by default no later than 60 days after the complaint is filed. If plaintiff requires additional time to apply for the entry of default or to move for judgment by default, plaintiff must file a motion for extension of time. (g) Initial Disclosures. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), at or prior to the Meeting of Parties described below, and without any formal discovery requests, each party must: (1) identify in writing the name and, if known, the address and telephone number of each individual with discoverable information relevant to the disputed facts; (2) provide copies of or a written description by category and location of all documents that are relevant to the disputed facts; (3) provide a written computation of any damages claimed; and (4) provide a copy of any insurance agreement that may be available to satisfy all or part of a possible judgment in the action or to indemnify or reimburse for payments made to satisfy the judgment.

(h) Meeting of Parties. At least 14 days prior to the pretrial or status conference, the attorneys for the parties, or the parties (if not represented by an attorney), must meet (the “Meeting of Parties”) to discuss: (1) the parties’ claims and defenses; (2) the possibility of settlement; (3) the initial disclosures required in section (g) above; and (4) a discovery plan as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f). Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the parties may orally announce their discovery plan at the pretrial or status conference and need not file a written report. (i) Pretrial or Status Conference.

The Court will conduct a pretrial or status conference at any time after a responsive pleading is filed but, in any event, approximately 90 days after the complaint is filed. The parties may not introduce testimony or documentary evidence at the pretrial or status conference. The Court, however, may consider relevant undisputed facts, affidavits offered without objection from the opposing parties, judicial notice items, and admissions made during the pretrial or status conference by parties either directly or through counsel. (j) Discovery.

(1) General. Parties should be familiar with the Local Rules regarding discovery, including Local Rules 7026-1, 7026-2, 7030-1, 7033-1, and 7037-1. (2) Commencement of Discovery. Absent leave of Court, discovery may not commence until the conclusion of the Meeting of Parties.

(3) Discovery Deadline. Parties must complete discovery no later than seven days before the trial date except that the parties may complete previously scheduled depositions up to the trial date. (4) Discovery Disputes. If a discovery dispute occurs, the parties must first confer in good faith to attempt to resolve the issues, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1), as incorporated by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7037.

If the parties are unable to resolve the dispute, any party may request a telephone conference with the Court so that the Court may render an informal, preliminary ruling on the discovery dispute, without prejudice to the right of any party to file a formal motion. (5) Discovery Papers Should Not Be Filed with the Court. Consistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 5, as incorporated by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7005, disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) or (2) and the following discovery responses and requests must not be filed with the Court until they are used in the case or proceeding or the Court orders filing: depositions, interrogatories, requests for documents or tangible things or to permit entry onto land, and requests for admissions. (k) Motions.

(1) General. A motion filed with the Court must request only one form of relief unless the request seeks alternative forms of relief under the same provision of the Bankruptcy Code or Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. (2) Format. All motions, responses, and replies must comply with the Court’s Style Guide posted on the Court’s website, www.flmb.uscourts.gov.

Papers should be double spaced and, where appropriate, include a legal memorandum containing argument and citations of authorities. (3) Page Limits. Absent leave of Court, all motions, responses, replies, and supporting memoranda must not exceed ten pages in length. Proofs of service, properly attached and identified exhibits, and the signature block of counsel are not considered for purposes of calculating page limits.

If any paper violates this subsection (k), the Court may, sua sponte or upon motion of a party, strike the subject paper. (4) Motions Required to Be Served Using the Court’s Negative Notice Procedures. The following motions must be served using the negative notice procedures of Local Rule 2002-4: (A) motions to dismiss and other motions under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012; (B) motions to amend pleadings; (C) motions regarding joinder or substitution of parties; (D) motions for leave to intervene; (E) motions to abstain; (F) motions for attorney’s fees or costs under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7054; (G) motions under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9023 and 9024; and submit a proposed order simultaneously with the filing of the motion if: (H) motions related to discovery, except that the moving party may (i) the responding party has failed to respond to a discovery request; objections, or deemed admissions; and (ii) the motion does not include a request for sanctions, waiver of (iii) documents or respond to the discovery request. the proposed order gives the respondent 14 days to produce The negative notice legend must provide for a 14-day response period. The moving party may file a reply, if desired, no later than seven days after the response is filed.

(5) Emergency Motions. The Court will, in its discretion, consider emergency motions at any time. Emergency motions must comply with Local Rule 9013-1(d) and must be filed using the Emergency Matters Notification Procedure on the Court’s website, www.flmb.uscourts.gov. (6) Motions to Determine if the Bankruptcy Court Has Authority to Enter Final Orders or Judgments.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b), the Bankruptcy Court does not have jurisdiction to enter final orders or judgments on claims (A) that are non-core or (B) that are statutorily core but that (i) involve state law claims that arise independently of the Bankruptcy Code and (ii) are not part of the claims allowance process. A party who seeks a determination that the Bankruptcy Court does not have jurisdiction to enter final orders or judgments on any issue raised in the adversary proceeding must file a motion for such determination no later than the date set for filing a response to the complaint. A party who fails to timely file such a motion is deemed to have consented to the Bankruptcy Court’s entry of final orders and judgments in the proceeding. However, a party’s failure to timely file such a motion does not constitute a waiver of that party’s right to appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 158.

(7) Motions for Summary Judgment. Unless the Court orders otherwise, motions for summary judgment must be filed no later than 60 days prior to trial. The Court may or may not set a hearing on the motion for summary judgment. Absent order or direction of the Court, the trial will proceed as scheduled even if a motion for summary judgment is pending.

(l) Pretrial Disclosures of Witnesses and the Use of Depositions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) (except with respect to time limits) governs pretrial disclosures regarding witnesses and use of depositions. Parties must file and exchange names, telephone numbers, and addresses for witnesses, and any designations of depositions at least 28 days before trial. Objections to the use of depositions must be filed within 14 days of the disclosure.

Parties must confer on any factual or evidentiary stipulations prior to trial. (m) Joint Stipulation of Undisputed Facts. The parties must meet in person or by video to prepare a joint stipulation of undisputed facts and exhibits that may be admitted into evidence without objection. The stipulation must be filed no later than seven days before the date set for trial.

(n) Exhibits. (1) Exhibits to Be Filed and Exchanged via CM/ECF. Parties must prepare exhibits in compliance with Local Rule 9070-1 and must file and exchange exhibits no later than seven days before the date set for trial. (2) Self-Authentication of Records of Regularly Conducted Activity.

A party who intends to rely upon the self-authentication procedures of Fed. R. Evid. 902(11) or (12) to introduce into evidence records of regularly conducted activities under Fed. R. Evid. 803(6) must, within at least 28 days before trial, file with the Court and serve on other parties the written declaration required by Fed. R. Evid. 902(11) or (12) and a copy of all records sought to be admitted. (3) Objections to Admissibility of Exhibits. Written objection to the admission of an exhibit into evidence on the grounds that the exhibit (A) lacks authentication or (B) does not qualify as an exception to the hearsay rule as a record of a regularly conducted activity under Fed. R. Evid. 803(6) must be filed before the close of business on the second day before trial or the objection will be deemed waived. (o) Expert Witness Testimony.

Unless the Court orders otherwise, a party who wishes to offer expert testimony at trial must comply with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2). (p) Stipulations. All stipulations of the parties must be made in writing, signed, and promptly filed with the Court. (q) Supplementation of Disclosures.

Parties are under a duty to supplement or correct their Initial Disclosures and their Pretrial Disclosures in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e). (r) Sanctions. Failure to comply with all requirements of this rule may result in the imposition of sanctions that could include striking a party’s pleading or denial of the right to introduce evidence or witness testimony. (s) Settlements.

Pursuant to Local Rule 9019-1, parties must immediately notify the Court of any settlement and promptly file and serve a motion to approve the compromise in the debtor’s main case, not in the adversary proceeding. If the complaint asserts claims under 11 U.S.C. § 523 only, a motion to approve the compromise is not necessary. However, if desired, the parties may seek approval of the settlement by filing a motion in the adversary proceeding. ________________________ Notes of Advisory Committee 2025 Amendment This amendment revises section (k)(4) to conform the rule to the Court’s Negative Notice and Accompanying Orders Lists regarding motions related to discovery in certain circumstances. Other changes are stylistic.

This amendment to the rule is effective August 15, 2025. 2024 Amendment The amendments to section (k) extend the ten-page limit to all motions, responses, replies and supporting memoranda filed with the Court and remove motions for summary judgment from the Court’s negative notice procedures. New section (m) conforms the rule to the Court’s current practices and form orders regarding joint stipulations of fact to be submitted before trial. Other changes are stylistic.

This amended rule is effective August 15, 2024. 2019 Amendment The amendment to section (k)(4) specifies the types of motions that are required to filed using the Court’s negative notice procedures. Amended section (m)(3) provides that written objection to the admission of an exhibit into evidence on the grounds that the exhibit (a) lacks authentication or (b) does not qualify as an exception to the hearsay rule as a record of a regularly conducted activity under Fed. R. Evid. 803(6) must be filed before the close of business on the second day before trial or the objection will be deemed waived. Revised section (k)(4) specifies the types of motions that are required to be filed using negative notice procedures.

This amended rule is effective July 1, 2019. 2017 Amendment This rule is revised to require that pleadings or other papers requesting injunctive relief so state in the title. And, consistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 5, the rule states that discovery papers must not be filed with the Court. Section (k)(6) is revised to more clearly explain that the Bankruptcy Court lacks jurisdiction to enter a final order or judgment in cases that are non-core or that are statutorily core but involve state law claims, as explained by the Supreme Court in Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 131 S. Ct.

2594, 180 L. Ed. 2d 475 (2011). Other amendments are stylistic. This amendment to the rule is effective July 1, 2017.

2016 This new rule incorporates the provisions of archived Administrative Order FLMB-2014- 10 “Administrative Order Prescribing Procedures for Adversary Proceedings.” In addition, section (f)(4) regarding pretrial disclosures is now consistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f). The rule also clarifies the requirement that motions in adversary proceedings be filed and served using the negative notice procedures of Local Rule 2002-4. This new rule is effective July 1, 2016. Rule 7026-1 DISCOVERY - GENERAL (a) General.

This rule applies generally to all contested matters and adversary proceedings. Local Rule 7001-1 addresses numerous discovery issues in adversary proceedings and, if ordered by the Court, in complex contested matters. (b) Contested Matters. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the disclosure requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) and the conference and reporting requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) do not apply in contested matters.

Unless the Court orders otherwise, the parties may commence discovery immediately after service of the paper initiating the contested matter is effected under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7004. (c) Discovery Papers Shall Not Be Filed With the Court. Consistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 5, incorporated by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7005, the parties’ written disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) and (2) and the following discovery responses and requests shall not be filed with the Court until they are used in the case or proceeding or the Court orders their filing: depositions, interrogatories, requests for documents or tangible things or to permit entry onto land, and requests for admissions. (d) Parties Must Meet and Confer Prior to Filing Discovery Motions.

Motions to compel and motions for protective order must include a certification at the beginning of the motion under the heading “Local Rule 7026-1(d) Certification” stating that the movant has in good faith conferred with the opposing party in an effort to resolve the issue without Court action, what specific actions were taken to confer, and whether the parties agree on the resolution of any portion of the motion. A motion that does not comply with this rule may be denied. Failure of the moving party to properly meet and confer, or the refusal of the non-moving party to meet and confer, may subject parties or their counsel to sanctions. Unless otherwise ordered, the requirement that a moving party confer with the opposing party requires that, at a minimum: (1) which must be by telephone; and movant made at least two attempts to contact the non-moving party, one of (2) movant’s first attempted contact must be at least 24 hours before filing the motion. ________________________ Notes of Advisory Committee 2024 Amendment The amendments to the rule contain specific requirements for parties to meet and confer (and to certify that they have done so) prior to filing discovery motions.

The requirement to detail specific actions taken to confer as required by this rule does not require disclosure of substantive communications. The amendments to this rule are effective August 15, 2024. 2017 Amendment This amendment adds new sections (c) and (d). This amendment to the rule is effective July 1, 2017.

2016 Amendment This amendment refers parties, in section (a), to Local Rule 7001-1 Adversary Proceedings - Procedures for issues relating to discovery. The amendment also clarifies that, absent order of the Court otherwise, the conference and reporting requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 do not apply to contested matters. Former section (c) regarding the depositions of non- resident parties has migrated to Rule 7030-1 Depositions upon Oral Examination. This amendment to the rule is effective July 1, 2016.

2004 Amendment This amendment corrects the Bankruptcy Rules citation to that of the currently used citation. 2000 Amendment This amendment is made necessary by the December 1, 2000, amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7026, Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 applies in adversary proceedings. Under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9014, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7026 also applies in contested matters.

Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9029(a)(1) further provides that the Court’s local rules may not be inconsistent with the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. The December 1, 2000, amendments to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 eliminate the provisions of that rule that permit courts to “opt out” of certain of its provisions that became effective on December 1, 1993. The Court is required, therefore, to rescind the provisions of its local rules by which it “opted out” of the mandatory disclosure and conference requirements contained in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)-(3) and (f). These “opt out” provisions are presently contained in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this Local Rule.

Because of these required rescissions, the Court is also required to rescind the initiation of discovery provisions contained in paragraph (c) of this Local Rule. As a consequence of this amendment, the provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 are fully applicable in adversary proceedings in the Court, although the terms of the rule set forth circumstances in which the parties may stipulate or the Court may order variations in individual cases. The Court may not do so, however, by local rule or standing order. Thus, the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) through (3) are generally applicable in adversary proceedings; the parties must meet as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f); and, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d), the parties may not seek discovery before the parties have conferred as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f).

Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7005 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d), the parties may not file with the Court the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) and (2) until they are used in the proceeding. The parties must file, however, the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3). Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9014, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7026 applies in contested matters “unless the court otherwise directs.” Thus, the Court retains the ability to direct by local rule that only portions of Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7026 apply in contested matters. The Court has therefore contemporaneously promulgated new Local Rule 9014-2 that applies Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7026 to contested matters only to the extent permitted before this amendment to this Local Rule.

Under Local Rule 9014-2, therefore, the mandatory disclosure provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)-(3) do not apply in contested matters, the parties are not required to confer as set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), and the parties may immediately seek discovery. Of course, the Court may direct the application of these Rule 26 provisions by specific order, and the parties may agree that they apply. “If necessary to comply with [the Court’s] expedited schedule for Rule 16(b) conferences,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) does permit the Court to make local rules as to certain matters related to the Rule 26(f) conference and the discovery plan. Unlike the timing and pace of litigation in civil actions in the district court, litigation in adversary proceedings in the bankruptcy court is handled on an expedited basis.

In the new provisions of this Local Rule appearing as new paragraphs (a) and (b), therefore, the Court exercises this discretion in the manner the Committee believes is appropriate. The Court, of course, can vary these times by individual order. The last paragraph of this Local Rule is re-lettered to reflect the rescission of old paragraphs (a) through (c) and the substitution of new paragraphs (a) and (b). This amendment to the rule was effective on December 1, 2000.

1997 Amendment This amendment conforms the existing Local Rules to the uniform numbering system prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States and to the model system suggested and approved by the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules of the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure. In renumbering the Local Rules to conform to the uniform numbering system, no change in substance is intended. This amendment to the rule was effective on April 15, 1997. Paragraphs (a) through (c) of this rule were formerly paragraphs (a) through (c) of Local Rule 2.15.

Paragraph (d) of this rule was formerly Local Rule 2.16(b). The Advisory Committee Notes to the superseded rules may be helpful in interpreting and applying the current rules. 1995 Amendment Introduction This rule is amended to reflect the Advisory Committee’s judgment as to the desirability of applying the December 1, 1993, amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to contested matters and adversary proceedings and to make other desirable technical changes. The December 1, 1993, amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure greatly affect practice in contested matters and in adversary proceedings.

Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7016, 7026, 7030, 7031, and 7033 extend the application of Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, 26, 30, 31 and 33 to adversary proceedings. In addition, unless the Court otherwise directs, Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9014 extends the application of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, 30, 31, and 33 to contested matters pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7026, 7030, 7031 and 7033. Although the Advisory Committee deems certain of the December 1, 1993, amendments to be desirable and beneficial to practice in contested matters and adversary proceedings in this Court, it believes that other of the amendments may not be practically or beneficially implemented. The Advisory Committee therefore intends here that the Court “opt out” of certain of these amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures as they are made applicable to contested matters and adversary proceedings.

Disclosure and Meeting of Counsel Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1-4) now mandates the disclosure of certain relevant information. Paragraph (a) of Local Rule 2.15 therefore provides that these new disclosure requirements apply to contested matters and adversary proceedings only if the parties agree or if the Court orders that some or all of the disclosure requirements apply. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) now requires a meeting of the parties and the filing of a proposed discovery plan within certain prescribed time limits. Paragraph (b) of Local Rule 2.15 therefore provides that these meetings and reporting requirements apply in contested matters and in adversary proceedings only upon the agreement of the parties or upon order of the Court.

Initiation of Discovery Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d), 30(a)(2)(C), 31(a)(2)(C), 33(a), 34(b), and 36(a) now generally preclude the initiation of any method of discovery until after the parties meet as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), unless the parties agree or the Court otherwise orders. Because the Court has eliminated, in paragraph (b), the meeting of the parties requirement of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) unless the Court specifically orders its application, paragraph (c) provides that the parties may initiate discovery immediately after service of the motion or other paper initiating contested matters and the summons and complaint in adversary proceedings. If the Court orders the application of the meeting of the parties requirement of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), however, the early initiation of discovery authorized in paragraph (c) would not apply and the parties would be precluded from initiating discovery until after the Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) meeting unless they agreed or the Court orders to the contrary. Paragraph (c) also continues the meaning and the intent of former Rule 2.14 as to depositions upon oral examination.

These amendments to the rule were effective on February 15, 1995. Rule 7026-2 E-DISCOVERY This Local Rule, adapted from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida’s Civil Discovery Handbook, applies to e-discovery in adversary proceedings and contested matters. References to Rules are to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as incorporated by the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. (a) General.

The Court’s e-discovery goal is to facilitate fair, open, and proportional discovery of the facts underlying a dispute so that the dispute is resolved on the merits and not by gamesmanship. This requires cooperation among counsel. The discovery of electronically stored information (“ESI”) stands on equal footing with the discovery of paper documents. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence provide a framework within which to conduct cost- effective e-discovery, but they cannot be effective unless attorneys become familiar with their applicability and use them where appropriate.

The early discussion and resolution of discovery issues is an important factor in reducing overall case length and the cost of litigation. Attorneys must take the time to educate themselves about ESI; because attorneys often lack the technical knowledge to fully understand ESI, they should consult their clients’ information technology departments and vendors regarding ESI issues. The Sedona Principles and the Sedona Cooperation Proclamation published by The Sedona Conference are an excellent source of information on the duties of clients and counsel and best practices for addressing the discovery of ESI. Additionally, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland has made available on its website Judge Paul Grimm’s “Suggested Protocol for Discovery of Electronically Stored Information,” which provides an excellent template for counsel.

(b) Preservation. A party has a duty to retain ESI that may be relevant to pending or reasonably anticipated litigation. The scope of a party’s preservation obligation is determined on a case-by-case basis. Rule 26(f) requires the parties to confer as soon as practicable and plan for discovery.

The discussion of preservation issues, to include each party’s records management policies and procedures, ideally should occur before suit is filed but certainly no later than the Rule 26 conference. The parties should exercise reason and good faith when they discuss issues concerning ESI. On the topic of preservation, counsel should be informed and otherwise prepared to articulate both good cause for the preservation of ESI and the costs and burdens of maintaining ESI. (c) Proportionality.

The discovery of ESI should be proportional to the amount in controversy, the nature of the case, and the resources of the parties. Rule 26(b)(2)(C) imposes a duty on the parties to balance the need for the discovery with the burdens of production. Rule 26(b)(2)(B) expressly provides that a party does not have to provide discovery of ESI that is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost except on motion and order of the Court. The Sedona Conference has published six principles to guide the Court and counsel in applying the concept of proportionality to civil litigation: (1) The burdens and costs of preservation of potentially relevant information should be weighed against the potential value and uniqueness of the information when determining the appropriate scope of preservation.

(2) Discovery should generally be obtained from the most convenient, least burdensome, and least expensive sources. (3) Undue burden, expense, or delay resulting from a party’s action or inaction should be weighed against that party. (4) Extrinsic information and sampling may assist in the analysis of whether requested discovery is sufficiently important to warrant the potential burden or expense of production. (5) Nonmonetary factors should be considered when evaluating the burdens and benefits of discovery.

(6) Technologies to reduce cost and burden should be considered in the proportionality analysis.1 (d) ESI Conference. The following is a list of topics counsel should discuss prior to or at the beginning of the case and no later than the Rule 26(f) conference. Counsel are strongly encouraged to include their clients’ information technology employees and vendors in these discussions. (1) The locations and sources where relevant ESI is likely to be found.

This includes the identity of people likely to have relevant ESI. (2) Reasonable steps to preserve ESI. (3) The relevant time period. (4) The manner and forms of preservation and production including the production of live database-based materials.

Possible formats for the production of ESI include native, TIFF, and PDF. Absent agreement or a Court order, Rule 34(b) provides that ESI should be produced in either the form in which it is “ordinarily maintained” or in a “reasonably useable” form. When deciding what format(s) to use, counsel, with the assistance of their information technology experts, are encouraged to discuss the following: information needed to establish the relevant facts in the case. (A) The form or forms of ESI that will be most likely to provide the (B) The need for metadata.

1 The Sedona Conference Commentary on Proportionality in Electronic Discovery, 11 Sedona Conf.

J. 289 (2010).

(C) Accessibility of ESI in the form requested. (D) The requesting party’s ability to manage and use ESI in the form requested. confidential information associated with the different forms of production. (E) Risks associated with the inadvertent production of privileged or (F) The difficulty of redacting ESI in the form requested. (G) The extent to which alternative forms of production will satisfy a party’s needs.

(H) The types of metadata that will be preserved and produced. (I) Sources of ESI that are not reasonably accessible. processing, reviewing, and producing ESI. (J) The relative costs and other burdens associated with collecting, (K) Allocation of the costs of production. (L) The use of search terms, sampling, de-duplication, “quick-peeks,” technology assisted review methods including, for example, predictive coding and other strategies to reduce the volume of ESI that must be preserved and produced. the use of “claw-back agreements.” (M) How to deal with issues of confidentiality and privilege including tranches.

(N) Tiered discovery in which ESI is produced sequentially in (O) Disposal of ESI at the appropriate time. (e) Procedure. Counsel should have sufficient technical knowledge to propound educated and reasonable requests for ESI. Opposing counsel should have sufficient technical knowledge to provide educated and reasonable responses to requests for ESI.

Blanket, overbroad, or burdensome requests for production invite blanket objections and lead to motions to compel and for protective orders. To avoid this process and reduce the volume and expense of discovering ESI, requests for production should, to the extent possible, clearly specify what is being sought including by topic and reference to persons involved. Responses to requests for ESI should state clearly and specifically what is being objected to and why. They should also clearly state the extent to which discovery of ESI will be permitted, the sources from which ESI has been obtained and potential sources of ESI that were not searched.

(1) Rule 34(b) establishes that unless requested in another form, the producing party must produce electronically stored information in the form or format in which it is usually maintained or in a form or format that is reasonably usable. The Rule permits testing and sampling as well as the inspection and copying of ESI. (2) Inspection of an opponent’s computer system is the exception, not the rule and the creation of forensic image backups of computers should only be sought in exceptional circumstances which warrant the burden and cost. A request to image an opponent’s computer should include a proposal for the protection of privacy rights, protection of privileged information, and the need to separate out and ignore non-relevant information.

(3) As an alternative to Bates-stamp numbers, counsel may wish to consider using hashtags or hash values to identify ESI. (4) Ordinarily, information should only be produced once, i.e., electronically or by paper copies, not both. (f) Resolving Discovery Disputes. The parties should resolve discovery disputes through the meet and confer process or, if such negotiations are unsuccessful, resort to motion practice.

Counsel should consult Rule 26(b)(2)(B) on proportionality and this Local Rule for relevant factors to discuss when they confer. (g) Discovery from Non-Parties. Rule 45 does not require a party issuing a subpoena for ESI to a non-party to confer with the non-party in advance. Nevertheless, in most cases, the party issuing the subpoena and the non-party responding to the subpoena should discuss, in advance, the same issues a party would discuss with an opposing party before commencing discovery of ESI.

(h) Metadata. Counsel are encouraged to discuss the types of metadata that are ordinarily maintained, the potential relevance of the metadata, the importance of reasonable accessible metadata to facilitate the parties’ review, production and use of ESI, and the locations of metadata that will be sought in discovery. Except as otherwise ordered by the Court, once produced, metadata is reviewable without notice to the producing party. ________________________ Notes of Advisory Committee 2024 Amendment The amendment conforms the rule to the updated Middle District Discovery: A Handbook on Civil Discovery Practice in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (located on the District Court’s website at www.flmd.uscourts.gov) and adds new section (h). This amendment to the rule is effective August 15, 2024.

2019 This new rule is adapted from Middle District Discovery: A Handbook on Civil Discovery Practice in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Rev. 6/05/15. This new rule is effective July 1, 2019. Rule 7030-1 DEPOSITIONS UPON ORAL EXAMINATION (a) Notice. Unless the Court orders otherwise, depositions upon oral examination of any person may be noticed on no less than 14 days’ notice in writing to every other party to the contested matter or adversary proceeding and to the deponent.

(b) Location. For the guidance of counsel in preparing or opposing contemplated motions for protective order under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7026 that relates to the place of taking a party litigant’s deposition or the deposition of the managing agent of a party, the Court’s general policy is (1) a non-resident plaintiff or moving party may reasonably be deposed at least once in this District during the discovery stages of the case; and (2) a non-resident defendant or respondent who intends to be present in person at trial may reasonably be deposed at least once in this District either during the discovery stages of the case or within a week prior to trial as the parties agree or the Court deems appropriate. A non-resident, within the meaning of this rule, is a person residing outside the Middle District of Florida. ________________________ Notes of Advisory Committee 2016 Amendment Section (b) incorporates former section (c) of Local Rule 7026-1 Discovery - General regarding the location of depositions of non-resident parties. The definition of “non-resident” has been changed from “a person residing outside the State of Florida” to “a person residing outside the Middle District of Florida.” Other amendments to the rule are stylistic.

This amendment to the rule is effective July 1, 2016. 1997 Amendment This amendment conforms the existing Local Rules to the uniform numbering system prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States and to the model system suggested and approved by the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules of the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure. In renumbering the Local Rules to conform to the uniform numbering system, no change in substance is intended. This amendment to the rule was effective on April 15, 1997.

This rule was formerly Local Rule 2.15(d). The Advisory Committee Notes to the superseded rules may be helpful in interpreting and applying the current rules. 1995 Amendment Paragraph (d) continues the policy of former Rule 2.14 that depositions be noticed on no less than ten days written notice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a)(2)(A) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 31(a)(2)(A) now limit to a total of ten the number of depositions upon oral examination and written questions unless the Court authorizes or the parties stipulate to a greater number.

The Advisory Committee believes this to be the appropriate presumptive number of depositions in contested matters and adversary proceedings, and the Advisory Committee therefore has not proposed an amendment setting a different presumptive number. These amendments to the rule were effective on February 15, 1995. Rule 7033-1 INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES Parties serving written interrogatories shall provide the responding party’s attorney, or the party if the party is not represented by an attorney, with a copy of the interrogatories in Word or WordPerfect format to enable the responding party to insert the answers to each interrogatory at the conclusion of that interrogatory. ________________________ Notes of Advisory Committee 2015 Amendment This amendment reflects the changes in word processing technology. This amendment to the rule is effective July 1, 2015.

1997 Amendment This amendment conforms the existing Local Rules to the uniform numbering system prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States and to the model system suggested and approved by the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules of the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure. In renumbering the Local Rules to conform to the uniform numbering system, no change in substance is intended. This amendment to the rule was effective on April 15, 1997. This rule is derived from Local Rule 2.15(e) and (f).

The Advisory Committee Notes to the superseded rules may be helpful in interpreting and applying the current rules. 1995 Amendment Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a) now limits each party to 25 written interrogatories including all discreet subparts unless, by order of the Court or written stipulation, a greater number is authorized. The Advisory Committee agrees that this is the appropriate presumptive number of interrogatories in contested matters and in adversary proceedings. As a consequence, the Advisory Committee has deleted the provisions of former paragraph (a) that allowed 50 written interrogatories.

These amendments to the rule were effective on February 15, 1995. Paragraphs (e) and (f) are former paragraphs (b) and (c) without substantial change. They continue the manner in which interrogatories are to be prepared, served, and answered. Rule 7037-1 FAILURE TO MAKE DISCOVERY: MOTIONS TO COMPEL DISCOVERY Motions to compel discovery pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7037 shall quote in full: (a) each interrogatory, question on deposition, request for admission or request for production to which the motion is addressed; (b) the objection and grounds therefor as stated by the opposing party; and (c) the reasons such objections should be overruled and the motion granted. ________________________ Notes of Advisory Committee 2004 Amendment This amendment corrects the Bankruptcy Rules citation to that of the currently used citation.

1997 Amendment This amendment conforms the existing Local Rules to the uniform numbering system prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States and to the model system suggested and approved by the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules of the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure. In renumbering the Local Rules to conform to the uniform numbering system, no change in substance is intended. This amendment to the rule was effective on April 15, 1997. This rule was formerly Local Rule 2.16(a).

The Advisory Committee Notes to the superseded rules may be helpful in interpreting and applying the current rules. 1995 Amendment Former subparagraph (a) required that motions to compel discovery or for protective order contain a certificate of counsel’s failed good faith efforts to resolve the dispute amicably. Substantially identical requirements now appear in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) and 37(a)(2)(A) and are applicable to adversary proceedings and contested matter through Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7026, 7037, and 9014. The provisions of former subparagraph (a) are therefore deleted as redundant.

These amendments to the rule were effective February 15, 1995. Rule 7055-2 JUDGMENTS BY DEFAULT When a defendant fails to respond after being timely served with a summons and complaint, cross-complaint, or third-party complaint, the plaintiff must seek entry of a Clerk’s default and a default judgment as follows: (a) Motion for Entry of Clerk’s Default. Motions for entry of Clerk’s default must be filed no later than 60 days after the complaint is filed and: (1) state that timely service was duly effectuated in compliance with the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure and that the defendant failed to file a responsive pleading or motion before the expiration of the time specified or any extension of time obtained; and (2) where applicable, include a sworn statement of non-military service based upon personal knowledge or a certification from the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act Centralized Verification Service that the defendant is not on active military duty. (b) Motion for Judgment by Default.

Motions for judgment by default must include a sworn statement supporting the allegations of the complaint, cross-complaint, or third-party complaint, and be accompanied by: (1) a proposed order granting motion for judgment by default; and (2) a proposed judgment. ________________________ Notes of Advisory Committee 2025 Amendment This amendment revises section (a) to make it consistent with Local Rule 7001-1(f) regarding the deadline for filing motions for default. Other changes are stylistic. This amendment to the rule is effective August 15, 2025. 2015 Amendment The amendments are stylistic and state the requirements for statements of non-military status.

This amendment to the rule is effective July 1, 2015. 2004 Amendment This amendment corrects the Bankruptcy Rules citation to that of the currently used citation. Further, this amendment adds definitions for new words and phrases created in these local rules specifically because of the newly implemented electronic filing system, CM/ECF. 1997 Amendment This amendment conforms the existing Local Rules to the uniform numbering system prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States and to the model system suggested and approved by the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules of the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure.

In renumbering the Local Rules to conform to the uniform numbering system, no change in substance is intended. This amendment to the rule was effective on April 15, 1997. This rule was formerly Local Rule 1.01(e). The Advisory Committee Notes to the superseded rules may be helpful in interpreting and applying the current rules.

1995 Amendment The amendments to Local Rule 2.09(a) and (c) are stylistic. No substantive change is intended. These amendments to the rule were effective on February 15, 1995.

PART VIII.

APPEALS