Education: 1979: J.D., The University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law; 1976: B.S., The University of Utah.

Career in Brief: 2003–present: US District Court for the District of Arizona, US District Judge; 1995–2003: Osborn Maledon, P.A., Partner; 1982–1995: Meyer, Hendricks, Victor, Osborn & Maledon (1986–1995: Partner; 1982–1986: Associate); 1981–1982: Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable Justice William H. Rehnquist, US Supreme Court; 1980–1981: O’Melveny & Myers, Associate; 1979–1980: Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable J. Clifford Wallace, US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

What do you enjoy most about your role as a federal judge? I appreciate the opportunity for public service. Practicing law was a wonderful career, but I am grateful now to be working for the greater public good.

The goal of our court system is to provide a truly neutral and fair forum for resolving difficult disputes as efficiently as possible. To the extent courts succeed, they provide an invaluable public service. I certainly do not succeed in every case, but I enjoy trying.

What impact do you foresee social media and other technological developments having on discovery and trial practice in general? The volume of evidence available in the digital age far exceeds anything we have seen in the past, which offers both opportunities and challenges for lawyers and parties. On one hand, there is more information available to aid in the search for truth. On the other hand, the increased volume of information threatens to make lawsuits prohibitively expensive. Moreover, traditional discovery practices will not work with these vast stores of information. Processing and using this evidence effectively requires significant ingenuity and much greater technical competence on the part of both the bench and the bar.

What do you wish attorneys explained to their clients about federal litigation? Clients must understand that they have a legal duty to preserve and produce relevant electronically stored information (ESI), and that they must involve counsel in these tasks. Too many lawyers seem to allow their clients to decide what information to preserve and produce. Proper preservation often requires lawyers to affirmatively intervene in their clients’ ESI systems and discuss preservation with all relevant custodians at the outset of a case. Lawyers must help their clients understand this reality by clearly and forcefully explaining what is required. They do their clients no favors by soft-pedaling the duty to preserve and produce, because a failure to preserve can lead to problems in the litigation.

What advice would you give to counsel appearing before you? Lawyers appearing in my courtroom should keep two main considerations in mind. First, be prepared and do the hard work of thinking through your case thoroughly at the beginning. Second, treat your opponents with the same courtesy and respect with which you would like to be treated.

How should counsel prepare for Rule 16 and Rule 26(f) conferences? As I mentioned above, lawyers should thoroughly and completely think through their cases at the outset of litigation. Additionally, they should meet with their clients to explain the clients’ preservation obligations and learn their ESI systems. Finally, lawyers should prepare to have a candid and transparent discussion with opposing counsel about what ESI is affected, where it is, and how both sides can produce it most efficiently.

How has your experience as the chair of the Advisory Committee on the FRCP during the recent rulemaking process impacted your approach to civil case management? I was an active case manager before, but I am even more so now. The amendments encourage judges to intervene early to help resolve cases swiftly and fairly. Judges should actively help the parties identify and complete relevant discovery in the most efficient way possible and be available to resolve disputes on these issues quickly.

What are the key takeaways for counsel and clients from the FRCP amendments? I hope those familiar with the process of crafting rule amendments will recognize that this process was thoughtful, fair, and inclusive. The primary takeaway from the amendments, in my view, is that everyone involved in civil litigation has a duty to make it speedier and less expensive than it has been in the past, without sacrificing justice.

I would encourage lawyers to study the intent of the rule amendments. We wrote fairly detailed Advisory Committee Notes that are published with the rules and provide a kind of legislative history. Lawyers who understand the intent of the changes will be better equipped to apply them and to persuade courts that they are applying them correctly.

What is your biggest courtroom pet peeve? Quarreling lawyers. The best lawyers vigorously and effectively represent their clients while remaining courteous to and considerate of their adversaries.

What is the best career advice you ever received? Take time for your family. Recognize that the law is not the highest priority in your life.

Which current or former Supreme Court Justice do you most admire, and why? Justice Rehnquist, because I came to know him well. He was brilliant, affable, funny, and not overly impressed with himself.