Case 1:06-cv-00044-GH Document 19 Filed 01/29/2007 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
NORTHERN DIVISION

DON HAMRICK

vs Case Number 1:06CV00044 GH

GEORGE W. BUSH ET AL

Initial Scheduling Order

The following deadlines and proposals are in effect:

(1) Rule 26(f) Conference Deadline: MARCH 9, 2007
The parties are jointly responsible for holding their Rule 26(f) on or before MARCH 9, 2007.
(2) Rule 26(f) Report Due Date: MARCH 23, 2007
Consult FRCP 26(f) and Local Rule 26.1 for information to be included in the Rule 26(f)
Report. The report should be filed with the Clerk of the Court.
(3) Proposed Trial Date: Week of NOVEMBER 12, 2007 in
BATESVILLE
(4) Rule 16(b) Conference (if needed) SCHEDULED IF NEEDED
A telephone conference will be held SCHEDULED IF NEEDED, if needed, to resolve any
conflicts among the parties with deadlines, the proposed trial date, mandatory disclosures, etc. If
the parties can agree on all issues in the Rule 26(f) Report and the trial date proposed by the Court,
then the telephone conference scheduled for SCHEDULED IF NEEDED will be unnecessary.
(5) Final Scheduling Order: Will be issued on or before APRIL 6, 2007
A Final Scheduling Order will be issued on or before APRIL 6, 2007, confirming the trial
date, setting deadlines, and resolving any disputes presented to the Court.

It will be the responsibility of the plaintiff to serve a copy of the Initial Scheduling
Order on any defendant who makes an appearance after the Initial Scheduling Order has been
filed. It will be the responsibility of the party filing a new claim after the date of the Initial
Scheduling Order to immediately serve a copy of the Initial Scheduling Order on new
defendant(s).

Dated: JANUARY 29, 2007

 Case 1:06-cv-00044-GH Document 19 Filed 01/29/2007 Page 2 of 2

AT THE DIRECTION OF THE COURT

JAMES W. MCCORMACK, CLERK

BY: /s/ Patricia L. Murray

COURTROOM DEPUTY CLERK

Note: If a party or party’s attorney fails to obey a scheduling order or pretrial order, or if no
appearance is made on behalf of a party at a scheduling or pretrial conference, or if a party or
party’s attorney is substantially unprepared to participate in the conference, or if a party or
party’s attorney fails to participate in good faith, the judge, upon motion or the judge’s own
initiative, may make such orders with regard thereto as are just, and among others any of the
orders provided in Rule 37(b)(2)(B), (C), (D). In lieu of or in addition to any other sanction,
the judge shall require the party or the attorney representing the party or both to pay the
reasonable expenses incurred because of any noncompliance with this rule, including attorney’s
fees, unless the judge finds that the noncompliance was substantially justified or that other
circumstances make an award of expenses unjust.