(a)     Case Management Conference. At any time after responsive pleadings or motions are due, the court may order, or a party, by serving a notice, may convene, a case management conference. The matter to be considered shall be specified in the order or notice setting the conference. At such a conference the court may:

(1)     schedule or reschedule the service of motions, pleadings, and other papers;

(2)     set or reset the time of trials, subject to rule 1.440(c);

(3)     coordinate the progress of the action if the complex litigation factors contained in rule 1.201(a)(2)(A)–(a)(2)(H) are present;

(4)     limit, schedule, order, or expedite discovery;

(5)      consider the possibility of obtaining admissions of fact and voluntary exchange of documents and electronically stored information, and stipulations regarding authenticity of documents and electronically stored information;

(6)     consider the need for advance rulings from the court on the admissibility of documents and electronically stored information;

(7)     discuss as to electronically stored information, the possibility of agreements from the parties regarding the extent to which such evidence should be preserved, the form in which such evidence should be produced, and whether discovery of such information should be conducted in phases or limited to particular individuals, time periods, or sources;

(8)     schedule disclosure of expert witnesses and the discovery of facts known and opinions held by such experts;

(9)     schedule or hear motions in limine; (10)          pursue the possibilities of settlement;narrowed;

(11)   require filing of preliminary stipulations if issues can be

(12)   consider referring issues to a magistrate for findings of fact; and

(13)   schedule other conferences or determine other matters that may aid in the disposition of the action.

(b)     Pretrial Conference. After the action is at issue the court itself may or shall on the timely motion of any party require the parties to appear for a conference to consider and determine:

(1)     the simplification of the issues;

(2)     the necessity or desirability of amendments to the pleadings;

(3)     the possibility of obtaining admissions of fact and of documents that will avoid unnecessary proof;

(4)     the limitation of the number of expert witnesses; (5)    the potential use of juror notebooks; and

(6)     any matters permitted under subdivision (a) of this rule.

(c)      Notice. Reasonable notice shall be given for a case management conference, and 20 days’ notice shall be given for a pretrial conference. On failure of a party to attend a conference, the court may dismiss the action, strike the pleadings, limit proof or witnesses, or take any other appropriate action. Any documents that the court requires for any conference shall be specified in the order. Orders setting pretrial conferences shall be uniform throughout the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

(d)     Pretrial Order. The court shall make an order reciting the action taken at a conference and any stipulations made. The order shall control the subsequent course of the action unless modified to prevent injustice.

Committee Notes
1971 Amendment. The 3 paragraphs of the rule are lettered and given subtitles. The present last paragraph is placed second as subdivision (b) because the proceeding required under it is taken before that in the present second paragraph. The time for implementation is changed from settling the issues because the language is erroneous, the purpose of the conference being to settle some and prepare for the trial of other issues. The last 2 sentences of subdivision (b) are added to require uniformity by all judges of the court and to require specification of the documentary requirements for the conference. The last sentence of subdivision (c) is deleted since it is covered by the local rule provisions of rule 1.020(d). The reference to the parties in substitution for attorneys and counsel is one of style because the rules generally impose obligations on the parties except when the attorneys are specifically intended. It should be understood that those parties represented by attorneys will have the attorneys perform for them in the usual manner.
1972 Amendment. Subdivision (a) is amended to require the motion for a pretrial by a party to be timely. This is done to avoid motions for pretrial conferences made a short time before trial and requests for a continuance of the trial as a result of the pretrial conference order. The subdivision is also amended to require the clerk to send to the judge a copy of the motion by a party for the pretrial conference.
1988 Amendment. The purpose of adding subdivision (a)(5) is to spell out clearly for the bench and bar that case management conferences may be used for scheduling the disclosure of expert witnesses and the discovery of the opinion and factual information held by those experts. Subdivision (5) is not intended to expand discovery.
1992 Amendment. Subdivision (a) is amended to allow a party to set a case management conference in the same manner as a party may set a hearing on a motion. Subdivision (c) is amended to remove the mandatory language and make the notice requirement for a case management conference the same as that for a hearing on a motion; i.e., reasonable notice.
2012 Amendment. Subdivisions (a)(5) to (a)(7) are added to address issues involving electronically stored information.

Court Commentary
1984 Amendment. This is a substantial rewording of rule 1.200. Subdivision (a) is added to authorize case management conferences in an effort to give the court more control over the progress of the action. All of the matters that the court can do under the case management conference can be done at the present time under other rules or because of the court’s authority otherwise. The new subdivision merely emphasizes the court’s authority and arranges an orderly method for the exercise of that authority. Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) of the existing rule are relettered accordingly. Subdivision (a) of the existing rule is also amended to delete the reference to requiring the attorneys to appear at a pretrial conference by referring to the parties for that purpose. This is consistent with the language used throughout the rules and does not contemplate a change in present procedure. Subdivisions (a)(5) and (a)(6) of the existing rule are deleted since they are now covered adequately under the new subdivision (a). Subdivisions (b) and (c) of the existing rule are amended to accommodate the 2 types of conferences that are now authorized by the rules.

Click Here to read more or browse blog articles related FRCP Rule 1.200