Parker v. Ritter et al

Filing 504

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 502 Plaintiff's Motion to Re-Open Discovery, by Judge James A. Parker on 01/19/2012.(wjc, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 08-cv-00737-MSK-KLM
KEITH PARKER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAPTAIN HALL,
MRS. DONNA WEBSTER,
LT. M. MCCORMICK,
LT. PIPER,
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, and
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Re-Open Discovery
[Docket No. 502; Filed January 17, 2012] (the “Motion”). “Whether to extend or reopen
discovery is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court . . . .” Smith v. United
States, 834 F.2d 166, 169 (10th Cir. 1987). The Tenth Circuit
identified several relevant factors in reviewing decisions concerning whether
discovery should be reopened, including: 1) whether trial is imminent, 2)
whether the request is opposed, 3) whether the non-moving party would be
prejudiced, 4) whether the moving party was diligent in obtaining discovery
within the guidelines established by the court, 5) the foreseeability of the
need for additional discovery in light of the time allowed for discovery by the
district court, and 6) the likelihood that the discovery will lead to relevant
evidence.
Smith, 834 F.2d at 169 (citation omitted).
Counsel for Plaintiff asks the Court to reopen discovery for the purpose of deposing
ten individuals identified by Plaintiff, but does not identify the individuals, explain the
purpose of the testimony, or state an estimated length of deposition for each individual.
Counsel for Plaintiff further failed to include in the Motion any analysis pursuant to the
1

factors identified in Smith. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Plaintiff may re-file the Motion, but he must apply the Smith factors to his request, and he
must state with specificity the identity of the individuals to be deposed, the purpose of each
individual’s testimony, and the expected hours required for each deposition.
Dated: January 19, 2012

2