A federal judge in Washington, D.C., laid out a series of deadlines Tuesday for further proceedings in a partner's gender bias lawsuit against Proskauer Rose and also directed the two sides into a mediation process to see if they might reach a settlement.

In a scheduling order related to discovery and other deadlines, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the District of Columbia ordered a mediation between Proskauer and the Jane Doe plaintiff, a Washington-based partner at the firm who has accused Proskauer of discrimination in a $50 million lawsuit.

The two sides had told Jackson in a joint filing on April 13 that they were “amenable” to mediation with a senior judge under an alternative dispute resolution proceeding established in the court's local rules. The parties noted that they had previously held settlement talks but couldn't reach an agreement. David Sanford of Sanford Heisler Sharp serves as lead counsel for Doe in the lawsuit, while Proskauer's Kathleen McKenna leads the team defending the law firm.

On Tuesday, Jackson wrote that Senior U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein of the Western District of Washington—who is on visiting status at the D.C. federal court from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington—would oversee the mediation. The two sides were directed to begin the mediation process on Tuesday and complete their talks by June 18, and to notify Jackson immediately if they reach a full or partial settlement of the case. Jackson said she will not put the litigation on hold during the mediation period.

Tuesday's scheduling order follows Jackson's decision in late March that denied a Proskauer motion for summary judgment and ordered the two sides to embark on limited discovery. The judge called for curtailed discovery aimed at addressing a key threshold issue of whether Doe can be defined as an “employee” under the workplace anti-discrimination laws invoked in the suit.

The two sides disagree on that question. Proskauer has argued that, as an equity partner, Doe owns part of Proskauer's business and falls outside the scope of workplace anti-discrimination laws, which are meant to protect employees as opposed to business owners. Doe's lawyers have countered that, even as an equity partner at the firm, she is far removed from having real control over the firm's business operations and that, in effect, she is an employee who deserves coverage under the anti-bias laws.

The court's answer to the question will likely come down to a fact-based analysis under the U.S. Supreme Court's 2003 ruling in Clackamas Gastroenterology Associates v. Wells. The court in Clackamas described a series of factors courts could use to determine a person's employment status—such as whether a person can hire and fire others, whether a person supervises others' work, whether a person reports to a superior, and whether a person shares in the business' profits and losses.

In addition to Jackson's notice about an upcoming mediation, the judge on Tuesday directed Doe to file by April 25 for leave to lodge an amended complaint and directed both sides to submit their initial discovery requests by April 27. The period for discovery, which at this point is limited to information related to Doe's employment status at the firm, is set to end on Oct. 31. Proskauer would then have an opportunity to file a renewed motion for summary judgment and to dismiss the case by the end of November.

A representative for Proskauer said the firm had no additional comment. Sanford Heisler partner Alexandra Harwin acknowledged the scheduling order in a brief statement, noting that the two sides had submitted a joint filing in which “they confirmed to the court that the parties are willing to make good faith efforts to attempt to resolve this case and stated that they are amenable to promptly participating in mediation with a senior judge according to the court's alternative dispute resolution procedures.”