Moreno v. Qwest Corporation
MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 19 Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Protective Order, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 5/24/2013. (mehcd)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-00103-RM-MEH
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on May 24, 2013.
Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Protective Order [filed April 22, 2013; docket #19] is
denied without prejudice for the following reasons.
First, the last sentence of paragraph 7 of the proposed order is inconsistent with the
requirements set forth in Fed. R. Evid. 502. Second, paragraph 11 contains contrary language in
giving the designating party an additional five days from the fifth day after which the parties fail
to resolve an objection within which to file a motion, then states that a document will forever lose
its confidential designation if the designating party does not file a motion within five days from the
date of the original objection. Finally, the Court declines to retain continuing jurisdiction after the
termination of the action, as set forth in paragraph 13.
The parties are permitted to re-file the motion together with a proposed order that conforms
to this order. If they choose to re-file the motion, the parties are directed to provide this Court with
a copy of the proposed order in Word or Word Perfect format.