Predator International, Inc. v. Gamo Outdoor USA, Inc.

Filing 462

MINUTE ORDER striking 441 , 442 , 443 , 444 , 445 , 446 , 447 , 448 , 449 , 450 Motions in Limine for failure to comply with Local Rule 7.1. By Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 1/17/14.(mnfsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 09-cv-00970-PAB-KMT
PREDATOR INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Colorado corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
GAMO OUTDOOR USA, INC., a Florida corporation,
Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Judge Philip A. Brimmer.
This matter is before the Court on the motions in limine [Docket Nos. 441-50]
filed by plaintiff Predator International, Inc. (“Predator”) on January 17, 2014. In each
motion, Predator provides the following certification: “Parties’ counsel have agreed to
oppose each other’s Motions in Limine but to respond no later than 5 days after the
filing thereof by notice to each other and to the Court with respect to whether their
opposition to any Motion in Limine continues.” See, e.g., Docket No. 442 at 1. The
Court interprets this language to mean that the parties have agreed that any motion in
limine the other party files is presumptively opposed; however, once filed and after
review, if it is not opposed, the non-filing party will notify the Court.
Local Rule 7.1 states that, “[b]efore filing a motion, counsel for the moving party
. . . shall confer or make reasonable good faith efforts to confer with any opposing
counsel . . . to resolve any disputed matter.” D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(a). The rule is
designed to promote judicial efficiency by encouraging parties to resolve disputes and
identify areas of agreement before filing a motion. The rule does not include an
exception permitting parties to effectively waive its application on the basis of private
agreement.
Wherefore, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 1 Re: Lou Riley [Docket No. 441],
Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 3 Re: Telephone Testimony for Regina Valladares
[Docket No. 442], Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 4 Re: Telephone Testimony for
Jennifer Apple, Now Jennifer Nunley [Docket No. 443], Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 5
Re: State Court Proceedings [Docket No. 444], Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 6 Re:
Summaries [Docket No. 445], Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 7 Re: Demonstrative

Exhibits [Docket No. 446], Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 8 Re: Fed. R. Evid. 404 and
406 [Docket No. 447], Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 9 Re: Pre-Judgment Interest
[Docket No. 448], Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 10 Re: Damages [Docket No. 449],
and Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 2 Re: Lee Phillips [Docket No. 450] are STRICKEN
for failure to comply with Local Rule 7.1.
DATED January 17, 2014.

2