Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 1 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

SHAWN K. AIKEN 2390 East Camelback Road Suite 400 Phoenix, Arizona 85016 Telephone: (602) 248-8203 docket@ashrlaw.com ska@ashrlaw.com ham@ashrlaw.com whk@ashrlaw.com sml@ashrlaw.com Shawn K. Aiken - 009002 Heather A. Macre - 026625 William H. Knight - 030514 Stephanie McCoy Loquvam 029045 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

THOMAS C. HORNE Attorney General Robert L. Ellman (AZ Bar No. 014410) Solicitor General Kathleen P. Sweeney (AZ Bar No. 011118) Todd M. Allison (AZ Bar No. 026936) Assistant Attorneys General 1275 W. Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2997 Telephone: (602) 542-3333 Fax: (602) 542-8308 Email: kathleen.sweeney@azag.gov Email: todd.allison@azag.gov Attorneys for Defendants UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Joseph Connolly and Terrel L. Pochert; Suzanne Cummins and Holly N. Mitchell; Clark Rowley and David Chaney; R. Mason Hite IV and Christopher L. Devine; Meagan and Natalie Metz; Renee Kaminski and Robin Reece; Jeffrey Ferst and Peter Bramley, v. Plaintiffs, Case No. 2:14-cv-00024-JWS JOINT INITIAL CASE STATUS REPORT AND SCHEDULING AND PLANNING CONFERENCE REPORT

Chad Roche, In His Official Capacity As Clerk Of The Superior Court Of Pinal County, Arizona; Michael K. Jeanes, In His Official Capacity As Clerk Of The Superior Court Of Maricopa County, Arizona; and Deborah Young, In Her Official Capacity As Clerk Of The Superior Court Of Coconino County, Arizona, Defendants.

Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 2 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Plaintiffs claim that Arizonas ban on same-sex marriage violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the U.S. Constitution. Defendants deny all of plaintiffs claims for relief. The parties plan to submit cross-motions for summary judgment without conducting discovery. Plaintiffs sued on January 6, 2014 (Doc. 1) and amended their complaint on February 10, 2014 (Doc. 15). Defendants answered the amended complaint on February 24, 2014 (Doc. 17) and amended their answer on March 17, 2014 (Doc. 21-1). Having conferred, the parties agree to, and suggest to the Court, the following briefing schedule: Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment (PMSJ): April 2014. Defendants response and cross-motion for summary judgment: 50 days following PMSJ. Plaintiffs combined (a) reply to motion for summary judgment and (b) response to defendants cross-motion for summary judgment: 70 days following PMSJ. Defendants reply to motion for summary judgment: following PMSJ. Neither party requests oral argument on the proposed cross-motions for summary judgment. If, however, the Court orders oral argument, under this schedule, Plaintiffs respectfully request argument during the week of July 7 or July 21, 2014. Defendants respectfully request argument during September 2014. Defendants agreement to these terms and the terms and stipulation of the attached Scheduling and Planning Conference Report (Ex. A) is predicated on the current status of the case, with the understanding that subsequent developments (such as court-ordered-trial or the disposition of the pending motion to consolidate this case with Majors v. Horne, 2:14-cv-00518-NVW Doc. #22) could necessitate a revision of the included terms. / / / / / / / / / 2 90 days

Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 3 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Counsel attach the Scheduling and Planning Conference Report (Exh. A). DATED: March 31, 2014. By /s/ Shawn K. Aiken -- 009002 Shawn K. Aiken Heather A. Macre William H. Knight Stephanie McCoy Loquvam 2390 East Camelback Road, Suite 400 Phoenix, Arizona 85016 Attorneys for Plaintiffs By /s/Shawn K. Aiken with permission Kathleen P. Sweeney Todd M. Allison Assistant Attorneys General 1275 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2997 Attorneys for Defendants

I hereby certify that on this 31st day of March, 2014 I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and a copy was electronically transmitted to the following: Kathleen P. Sweeney Todd M. Allison Assistant Attorneys General 1275 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2997 kathleen.sweeney@azag.gov todd.allison@azag.gov Attorneys for Defendants /s/ DeAnn M. Buchmeier
S:\Connolly - Pochert\21401001\Pleadings\JtInitialCaseStatusReport 140331.docx

Jonathan Caleb Dalton Byron J. Babione Special Assistant Attorney General Alliance Defending Freedom 15100 North 90th Street Scottsdale, Arizona 85260 CDalton@alliancedefendingfreedom.org BBabione@alliancedefendingfreedom.org Attorneys for Defendants

Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 4 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Exhibit A

Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 5 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

SHAWN K. AIKEN 2390 East Camelback Road Suite 400 Phoenix, Arizona 85016 Telephone: (602) 248-8203 docket@ashrlaw.com ska@ashrlaw.com ham@ashrlaw.com whk@ashrlaw.com sml@ashrlaw.com Shawn K. Aiken - 009002 Heather A. Macre - 026625 William H. Knight - 030514 Stephanie McCoy Loquvam 029045 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

THOMAS C. HORNE Attorney General Robert L. Ellman (AZ Bar No. 014410) Solicitor General Kathleen P. Sweeney (AZ Bar No. 011118) Todd M. Allison (AZ Bar No. 026936) Assistant Attorneys General 1275 W. Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2997 Telephone: (602) 542-3333 Fax: (602) 542-8308 Email: kathleen.sweeney@azag.gov Email: todd.allison@azag.gov Attorneys for Defendants UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Joseph Connolly and Terrel L. Pochert; Suzanne Cummins and Holly N. Mitchell; Clark Rowley and David Chaney; R. Mason Hite IV and Christopher L. Devine; Meagan and Natalie Metz; Renee Kaminski and Robin Reece; Jeffrey Ferst and Peter Bramley, v. Plaintiffs, Case No. 2:14-cv-00024-JWS SCHEDULING AND PLANNING CONFERENCE REPORT

Chad Roche, In His Official Capacity As Clerk Of The Superior Court Of Pinal County, Arizona; Michael K. Jeanes, In His Official Capacity As Clerk Of The Superior Court Of Maricopa County, Arizona; and Deborah Young, In Her Official Capacity As Clerk Of The Superior Court Of Coconino County, Arizona, Defendants.

Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 6 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

I.

MEETING. In accordance with Rule 26(f), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a meeting was

held on March 25, 2014 and was attended by: Shawn Aiken and William Knight for the Plaintiffs; and, Kathleen Sweeney, Todd Allison, Byron Babione, and Caleb Dalton for the Defendants. As a result of that meeting, the parties recommend the following: II. DISCLOSURES. The information required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1): The Parties hereby stipulate to waive the initial disclosure obligation under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1). A. B. C. 1. 2. III. Has been exchanged by the parties. Will be exchanged by the parties on or before (Date). Preliminary witness lists: Have been exchanged by the parties. Will be exchanged by the parties on or before (Date).

CONTESTED ISSUES OF FACT AND LAW. Preliminarily, the parties expect the following issues of fact and/or law to be

presented to the Court: whether the State of Arizonas ban on same-sex marriage should be stricken under the equal protection or due process clauses of the U.S. Constitution. IV. DISCOVERY PLAN. The parties jointly propose to the Court the following discovery plan. A. B. C. The parties expect that discovery will be needed on the following issues: Are there issues about preserving discovery information? ___ Yes XX No Disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information should be The parties do not expect that any discovery will be needed.

handled as follows: This issue does not apply to the case. 2

Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 7 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
1

D.

Claims of privilege or of protection of trial preparation materials. 1. 2. 3. XX There is no indication that this will be an issue. The parties have entered into a confidentiality agreement. The parties will submit their proposed confidentiality agreement on or before: (date)

E.

Disclosure of expert reports: 1. 2. 3. 4. By all parties on or before: (date) By plaintiff(s) on or before: (date) By defendant(s) on or before: (date) Rebuttal reports on or before: (date)

The parties do not plan to retain experts or disclose any expert reports.

F. Civ.P. 26(e):

Supplementation of disclosures and discovery responses under Fed. R.

The parties do not plan to undertake written discovery. 1. 2. G. At intervals of (Number) days; and final supplements will be served and filed 60 days before the close of fact discovery. As new information is acquired, but not later than 60 days before the close of fact discovery. A final witness list disclosing all lay and expert witnesses whom a party may wish to call at trial will be served and filed: (Date).1 The parties do not plan to try the case to either the Court or a jury. H. Time for completing discovery: 1. 2. 3. Fact discovery will be completed on or before: (Date); Expert discovery will be completed on or before: (Date); All discovery will be completed on or before: (Date). The parties do not intend to engage in any fact or expert discovery.

This date may be more than but not less than 45 days prior to the close of discovery. Only those witnesses disclosed at this time will be permitted to testify at trial. 3

Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 8 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
2

I.

Limitations on discovery. 1. 2. The limitations contained in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b), 30, and 33 will apply except as indicated below. The maximum number of depositions by each party will not exceed (number). (a) Depositions will not exceed (Number) hours as to any deponent. (b)Depositions will not exceed (Number) hours as to nonparty deponents. (c)Depositions will not exceed (Number) hours as to party deponents.2 3. 4. 5. The maximum number of interrogatories posed by each party will not exceed (Number) The maximum number of requests for admissions posed by each party will not exceed (Number) Other limitations: (insert other limitations)

V.

PRETRIAL MOTIONS. A. Are there preliminary motions as to jurisdiction, venue, arbitration, Yes XX No (If yes,

and/or statutes of limitation that should be filed within 60 days. explain) (Explanation) B. 1. Motions -- Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b): XX

Will be served and filed within the times specified in the

applicable rules.

Unless otherwise specified, the court will consider corporate officer, Rule 30(b)(6) witness, and expert witness deposition to be subject to the time limitation applicable to party depositions. 4

Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 9 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 E. D. VI. C.

2. 3. 4. 5.

Motions to amend pleadings or add parties will be filed not later than April 1, 2014. Motions under the discovery rules will be filed not later than Motions in limine will be filed not later than . Dispositive motions (including motions for summary judgment) will be filed not later than (Date).

Defendants anticipate potential Eleventh Amendment issues and may file a

motion to dismiss the claim for nominal damages as barred by the Eleventh Amendment. OTHER PROVISIONS: A. The parties ____ do XX do not request a conference with the court before

the entry of a scheduling order. (If the parties do request a conference prior to entry of the order, please explain): (Explanation) B. C. The parties ____ do _XX do not consent to trial before a magistrate judge. The disclosure requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1, if applicable: 1. 2. 1. XX Have been complied with. ____ Compliance will be accomplished on or before (Date) ____ Do the parties request immediate assistance by way of a settlement conference or alternative dispute resolution? ____ Yes XX No. If Yes, explain (Explanation). 2. ____ Do the parties wish to consider private mediation or settlement conference with a judicial officer of this court at a later date? ____ Yes XX No. The scheduling order will make provision for pretrial conferences, certification of the case as ready for trial, and a final pretrial order.

Early settlement/alternative dispute resolution.

Case 2:14-cv-00024-JWS Document 25 Filed 03/31/14 Page 10 of 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

VII.

TRIAL. The parties do not anticipate that a trial will be necessary. If, however, the Court so finds: A. B. The case is expected to take (Number) __6__ days to try. 1. 2. A jury trial has been demanded by defendants. XX Yes ____ No The right to a jury trial ____ is XX is not disputed.

DATED: March 31, 2014. By /s/ Shawn K. Aiken -- 009002 Shawn K. Aiken Heather A. Macre William H. Knight Stephanie McCoy Loquvam 2390 East Camelback Road, Suite 400 Phoenix, Arizona 85016 Attorneys for Plaintiffs By /s/Shawn K. Aiken with permission Kathleen P. Sweeney Todd M. Allison Assistant Attorneys General 1275 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2997 Attorneys for Defendants

I hereby certify that on this 31st day of March, 2014 I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and a copy was electronically transmitted to the following: Kathleen P. Sweeney Todd M. Allison Assistant Attorneys General 1275 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2997 kathleen.sweeney@azag.gov todd.allison@azag.gov Attorneys for Defendants /s/ DeAnn M. Buchmeier
S:\Connolly - Pochert\21401001\Pleadings\JtInitialCaseStatusReport 140331.docx

Jonathan Caleb Dalton Byron J. Babione Special Assistant Attorney General Alliance Defending Freedom 15100 North 90th Street Scottsdale, Arizona 85260 CDalton@alliancedefendingfreedom.org BBabione@alliancedefendingfreedom.org Attorneys for Defendants