Metcalf et al v. FCI and Associates, Inc. et al

Filing 22

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS that the District Court stay all proceedings in this case until and including February 1, 2010. At that time, if the matter is not resolved, this Court will set the matter for a status conference at which the Court will set a schedule for continued discovery in this case. by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 12/18/09. (erv, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 09-cv-01295-PAB-MEH JUSTIN METCALF, WILLIAM CURRIER, and HERMAN CHRISTOPHE, individually and on behalf of similarly situated individuals, Plaintiffs, v. FCI AND ASSOCIATES, INC., DAN FITCH, and MIKE BUCHART, Defendants. RECOMMENDATION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge. This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. This Court met with (on October 28, 2009), and will continue to meet with, the parties in this action in an effort to resolve the litigation short of trial. The parties have agreed to engage in certain actions taken toward early resolution, which include an exchange of information and which will require some time to complete. Therefore, in support of the parties' continued efforts toward resolving this matter and as a matter of judicial economy and efficiency, the Court RECOMMENDS1 that the District Court stay all proceedings in

Be advised that all parties shall have ten (10) days after service hereof to serve and file any written objections in order to obtain reconsideration by the District Judge to whom this case is assigned. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. The party filing objections must specifically identify those findings or recommendations to which the objections are being made. The District Court need not consider frivolous, conclusive or general objections. A party's failure to file such written objections to proposed findings and recommendations contained in this report may bar the party from a de novo determination by the District Judge of the proposed findings and recommendations. United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 676-83 (1980); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Additionally, the failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within ten (10) days after being
1

this case until and including February 1, 2010. At that time, if the matter is not resolved, this Court will set the matter for a status conference at which the Court will set a schedule for continued discovery in this case. Dated at Denver, Colorado, this 18th day of December, 2009. BY THE COURT:

Michael E. Hegarty United States Magistrate Judge

served with a copy may bar the aggrieved party from appealing the factual findings of the Magistrate Judge that are accepted or adopted by the District Court. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991); Niehaus v. Kansas Bar Ass'n, 793 F.2d 1159, 1164 (10th Cir. 1986). 2