Schlenker v. City of Arvada, Colorado et al

Filing 24

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 20 Motion for Leave by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 7/6/2009.(klmcd)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 09-cv-01189-WDM-KLM GERALD SCHLENKER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF ARVADA, COLORADO, PRIDEMARK PARAMEDIC SERVICES, ST. ANTHONY'S NORTH HOSPITAL, DON WICK, Chief of the Arvada Police Department, in his official capacity, CHARLES J. HUMPHREY, in his individual and official capacity, JOSEPH HERTEL, in his individual and official capacity, JEFFREY ORNDOFF, in his individual and official capacity, EAMMON DOLAN, Pridemark Paramedic, BEN STONE, Pridemark Paramedic, LISA B. PATEL, M.D., St. Anthony's North Medical Provider, WILLIAM A. SHARP, M.D., St. Anthony's North Medical Provider, LORRIE E. GRIFFEY, R.N., St. Anthony's North Medical Provider, P. TIM DIXON, St. Anthony's North Medical Provider, and TINA M. BITTERMAN, St. Anthony's North Medical Provider, Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________ MINUTE ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Defendants Pridemark Paramedic Services, Eammon Dolan, and Ben Stone's Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to Plaintiff's Verified Complaint and Jury Demand [Docket No. 20; Filed July 2, 2009] (the "Motion"). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED without prejudice due to Defendants' failure to comply with their duty to certify conferral pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1(A). Contacting the opposing party on the date of a motion's filing and receiving no response does not satisfy a party's obligation to make a meaningful effort to confer and apprise the Court of the opposing party's position. Dated: July 6, 2009

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?