Case Management Report: What to Include, When to File, and Exemptions

A case management report is the joint written document the parties in a federal civil lawsuit file after their Rule 26(f) conference, proposing how discovery will be conducted and how the case will move toward resolution. Required by Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it covers initial disclosures, the scope and schedule of discovery, handling of electronically stored information, privilege protections, and any changes to the default discovery limits. The judge uses it to issue a binding scheduling order under Rule 16(b), so the proposals in the report shape the deadlines that govern the rest of the case.

The Meet and Confer That Comes First

The report grows out of a conference the parties must hold before they file anything. Rule 26(f) requires attorneys for all parties and any unrepresented parties to meet as soon as practicable, and no later than 21 days before the court’s scheduling conference or the deadline for a scheduling order under Rule 16(b).¹ The conference can happen in person, by phone, or by video.

At the conference the parties discuss the nature of their claims and defenses, whether early settlement is realistic, how to arrange the required initial disclosures, how to preserve relevant evidence, and what discovery plan to propose to the court. All counsel of record and unrepresented parties share responsibility for setting up the conference and making a good-faith effort to agree on the plan.¹

One consequence catches new litigators off guard. Under Rule 26(d), no party may seek formal discovery before this conference, with narrow exceptions for exempted cases or where the court or parties agree otherwise. Delaying the conference freezes your ability to serve interrogatories, requests for production, or deposition notices.

What Goes in the Report

The report is essentially a proposed discovery plan. Rule 26(f)(3) requires the plan to address six things:¹

Any changes to the timing, form, or requirements of the mandatory Rule 26(a) disclosures, plus the status of disclosures already made or a proposed date for making them.
The subjects on which discovery is expected, a proposed completion date, and whether discovery should be phased or focused on particular issues first.
How the parties will handle disclosure, discovery, and preservation of electronically stored information, including the format of production.
How the parties plan to handle attorney-client privilege and work-product claims, including whether they want the court to enter a clawback order under Federal Rule of Evidence 502.
Any proposed changes to the default limits on interrogatories, depositions, or requests for admission, and any additional limits the parties want.
Anything else the parties want the court to address, including protective orders under Rule 26(c) or scheduling matters under Rule 16(b) and (c).

Many federal districts pile requirements on top of that baseline through local rules or standing orders. Courts commonly ask the parties to also confirm the basis for jurisdiction, summarize claims and defenses, identify anticipated motions, address alternative dispute resolution options, and propose dates for expert disclosures, pretrial conferences, and trial. Formats vary, and many judges post fill-in templates or checklists on the court’s website. Check the local rules and the assigned judge’s individual practices before you draft.

Privilege and Clawback Language

The privilege section is worth extra attention. In document-heavy litigation, privileged materials almost always slip through review at some point. Without a protective agreement, the producing party has to prove it took reasonable steps to prevent the disclosure and moved quickly to correct it, which is a hard standard to meet.

Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) offers a way around that problem. It lets the court enter an order stating that producing a privileged document in the litigation does not waive privilege, either in the current case or in any other federal or state proceeding.² With a 502(d) order in place, a party can claw back accidentally produced privileged documents without having to defend the quality of its review process. The case management report is where the parties propose this so the judge can fold it into the scheduling order.

Expert Witness Schedule

The report typically proposes a timeline for expert witness disclosures, even though the detailed disclosure requirements under Rule 26(a)(2)(B) come into play later. Settling on the sequence early, retained experts first, then rebuttal experts, with dates that leave room for depositions before dispositive motions, keeps expert disputes from crowding trial preparation.

When to File

The parties have 14 days after the Rule 26(f) conference to submit the written report to the court.¹ Usually one attorney takes the pen, drafts the document, and circulates it, but all parties share the obligation to file it on time. Where the parties disagree on a particular proposal, the report should set out both positions so the judge can rule.

Some courts compress these windows. A local rule can shorten the 21-day pre-conference period and require the written report sooner than 14 days after the conference. Some courts skip the written report entirely and let the parties present their plan orally at the Rule 16(b) scheduling conference.¹p>

What the Judge Does With It

Once the report arrives, the judge uses it to issue a scheduling order, sometimes called a case management order. Rule 16(b) requires the judge to issue that order as soon as practicable. Unless there’s good cause for delay, it must come within the earlier of 90 days after any defendant has been served or 60 days after any defendant has appeared.³

The scheduling order must set deadlines for joining new parties, amending pleadings, completing discovery, and filing motions. The judge can add more: modified disclosure timelines, discovery limits, procedures for electronically stored information, clawback provisions, dates for pretrial conferences and trial, and a requirement that parties request a court conference before filing discovery motions.³ The parties’ proposals carry weight, but the judge is not bound by them. Once entered, the scheduling order supersedes the report.

Changing Deadlines Later

Deadlines in a scheduling order are hard to move. Rule 16(b)(4) allows modification only if the requesting party shows “good cause” and gets the judge’s consent.³ Good cause generally means the party could not have met the deadline despite acting diligently. Disagreement between the parties, poor planning, or neglect will not qualify.

A motion to modify a discovery deadline should explain what discovery is done, what remains, why it isn’t done yet, how much time is needed, and how the change affects other deadlines. File the motion before the deadline passes. Courts routinely deny after-the-fact requests absent extraordinary circumstances.

What Happens If You Ignore the Process

The rules create two separate layers of sanctions.

If a party or its attorney fails to participate in good faith in developing and submitting the discovery plan under Rule 26(f), the court can order that party or attorney to pay the other side’s reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, caused by the failure.⁴ That penalty exists to make the conference and report matter.

Violating the scheduling order itself carries heavier consequences. Under Rule 16(f), if a party fails to appear at a scheduling conference, shows up substantially unprepared, or disobeys the scheduling order, the court can impose any sanction it considers just. Options include prohibiting the party from introducing certain evidence, striking pleadings, treating designated facts as established, staying the proceedings, or dismissing the case. On top of any of those, the court must order the noncompliant party or attorney to pay the other side’s reasonable expenses and fees unless the violation was substantially justified.³ Dismissal is reserved for egregious situations, but the risk is real enough that scheduling order deadlines should be treated as effectively immovable.

Cases That Don’t Require a Report

Not every federal case runs through this process. Rule 26(a)(1)(B) exempts certain proceedings from the initial disclosure requirements, and those exemptions also relieve the parties from holding a Rule 26(f) conference or filing the report. The exempt categories are:¹

Appeals of administrative agency decisions reviewed on the administrative record
Federal forfeiture actions against property
Habeas corpus petitions and other challenges to criminal convictions or sentences
Lawsuits filed without an attorney by someone in government custody
Actions to enforce or challenge an administrative summons or subpoena
Government actions to recover benefit overpayments
Government actions to collect on federally guaranteed student loans
Proceedings ancillary to cases in another court
Actions to enforce arbitration awards

Local rules can exempt additional categories. Courts handling high volumes of routine matters sometimes waive the conference and report for streamlined case types. If you’re unsure whether your case qualifies, check the local rules for the district and the assigned judge’s standing orders.

1
Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 26 – Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
2
Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 502 – Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product; Limitations on Waiver
3
Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 16 – Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management
4
Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 37 – Failure to Make Disclosures or to Cooperate in Discovery; Sanctions