By

Summary of the Amendments to the Local Civil Rules of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada

By Jonathan W. Fountain, Esq., Guest Blogger

On April 17, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada published its amended Local Civil Rules.  A red lined document comparing the amendments to the prior version can be found at the bottom of this article.   Guest Blogger Jonathan Fountain provides us with this summary of the changes.  As always, a summary is no substitute for studying the rules yourself, but this one is sure to help you get a jump start on understanding the amendments.

Jonathan Fountain

Jonathan Fountain, Esq.

LR IA 11-2 – Admission to Practice in a Particular Case

  • Certificates of Good Standing valid if issued within last 6 months.
  • Changes time for compliance from within 45 days to within 14 days of first appearance.

LR IA 11-6 – Appearances, Substitutions, and Withdrawals

  • Withdrawals may be accomplished by motion or by stipulation signed by existing counsel, new counsel, and the client.

LR IA 11-8 – Sanctions

  • Adds failure to comply with the Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct as grounds for imposing sanctions.

LR IC 2-2 – Filer Responsibilities When Electronically Filing Document

  • Requires courtesy copies to be the “filed” document (the copy that bears the Court’s header on each page) and that they be both indexed and tabbed.
  • Notices of Errata must identify what has changed in the corrected document.

LR IC 4-1 – Service

  • A Separate proof of service is no longer required for electronically filed documents.

LR 5-1 – Proof of Service

  • Amended to indicate that the rule only applies to those limited circumstances in which a proof of service is required.  See R. Civ. P. 5(d)(1)(B).

LR 7-3 – Page Limits

  • Clarifies that page limits cannot be exceeded by filing multiple motions.  For example, in a 6 count case, you would not be able to file three motions for partial summary judgment, each addressed to two counts in order to get around the page limit.
  • If a motion to exceed page limits is filed but not ruled on, the opposing party should respond to the over-length brief.

LR 8-1 – Pleading Jurisdiction

  • Removes the requirement that the basis for subject-matter jurisdiction be pled as the first allegation of a complaint.

LR 16-4 – Form of Pretrial Order

  • Removes the requirement that parties separately identify the plaintiff’s stipulated exhibits and the defendant’s stipulated exhibits and that the parties separately state any additional stipulation concerning such exhibits.

LR 16-6 – Early Neutral Evaluation

  • Removes the requirement that parties detail the history of prior settlement negotiations in their confidential Early Neutral Evaluation statement.

LR 26-1 – Discovery Plans and Mandatory Disclosures

  • Adds the option of setting forth in the proposed scheduling order a requirement that the parties request a conference with the assigned magistrate prior to filing any discovery motion.

LR 26-3 – Interim Status Reports – deleted in its entirety.

LR 26-8 – Discovery Papers

  • Amended to add that deposition notices and transcripts are not filed with the court until they are used in the proceeding, unless the court orders otherwise.

LR 30-1 – Depositions

  • New rule.
  • A deposing party must make the original transcript of a deposition available at the pretrial hearing, at trial, or when ordered by the court.

LR 42-1 – Noticing the Court on Related Cases; Consolidation of Cases

  • After consolidation, the Clerk of the Court must administratively close the later-filed actions.

LR 54-1 – Costs Other than Attorneys’ Fees

  • Eliminates presumption that prevailing parties are entitled to reasonable costs.

LR 54-14 – Motions for Attorneys’ Fees

  • Removes first subsection as duplicative of Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2)(B)(i), but does NOT eliminate the requirement that such motions be filed within 14 days after entry of the final judgment or order disposing of the action.

LR 59-1 – Motions for Reconsideration of Interlocutory Orders

  • Adds new provision that such motions must be brought within a “reasonable time” and that lack of diligence in bringing the motion may result in denial of the motion.

LR 67-2 – Investment of Funds on Deposit

  • Clarifies that the Court’s Registry Account is an interest-bearing account.

LSR 2-1 – Pro Se Civil-Rights Complaints; Form of Complaint

  • Requires use of the Court’s form or be legible and contain all information called for in the Court’s form.

LSR 3-1 – Petitions for Writ of Habeas Corpus; Form of Petition

  • Clarifies that pro se petitions use of the Court’s form or be legible and contain all information called for in the Court’s form.

LSR 4-1 – Motions Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255

  • Clarifies that motions challenging a prison sentence must use the Court’s form or be legible and contain all information called for in the Court’s form or use the form appended to the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings for the United States District Courts.

Guest Blogger Jonathan Fountain is an attorney practicing in the federal and state courts.  His areas of practice include general commercial litigation and intellectual property litigation (patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright, and domain name disputes).

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download [174.65 KB]

About the Author

Jay Young is a Las Vegas, Nevada attorney. His practice focuses on acting as an Arbitrator and Mediator.

Mr. Young can be reached at 702.667.4868 or at jay@h2law.com.

The information provided on this site does not, and is not intended to constitute legal advice. You understand each legal matter should be considered to be unique and subject to varying results. You should not take or refrain from taking action based on any information contained on this website without first consulting legal counsel, as it is not intended to advise you on your particular matter. Further, you understand that no guarantee is given that the information contained herein is an accurate statement of the law at any given point in time, as the law is constantly changing. Guest bloggers are responsible for their own content, which is not to be construed as an article authored by Jay Young. Please see http://nevadalaw.info/disclaimer

 

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: