GEA Power Cooling Systems, LLC v. Bechtel Power Corporation

Filing 26

Minute Entry - Courtroom Minutes for Scheduling Conference held on 1/5/2010 before Judge Richard P. Matsch. ORDERED: GEA's Partial Motion to Dismiss, filed November 25, 2009 20 , is denied. Bechtel's Motion to Dismiss the Second and Thir d Claims for Relief in GEA's First Amended Complaint, filed December 3, 2009 23 , is denied. Status Conference scheduled August 12, 2010. Status report due August 5, 2010. Plaintiff's claim for declaratory judgment is withdrawn. Responsive pleadings are due by January 15, 2010. Scheduling Order approved. (Reporter FTR - K. Terasaki) (rpmcd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch Date: January 5, 2010 Courtroom Deputy: J. Chris Smith FTR Technician: Kathy Terasaki ____________________________________________________________________________ Civil Action No. 09-cv-02051-RPM GEA POWER COOLING SYSTEMS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as successor in interest to GEA POWER COOLING SYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. BECHTEL POWER CORPORATION, a Nevada corporation, Joseph C. Smith, Jr. Alison G. Wheeler Thomas C. Bell Judith Lifschitz Michelle M. Meyer

Defendant. ____________________________________________________________________________ COURTROOM MINUTES ____________________________________________________________________________ Scheduling Conference 1:55 p.m. Court in session.

Court reviews proposed scheduling order and counsel answer questions. Mr. Lifschitz states the arbitration proceeding was between the owner and Bechtel before a three person panel. Findings and conclusions were made. ORDERED: GEA's Partial Motion to Dismiss, filed November 25, 2009 [20], is denied. Bechtel's Motion to Dismiss the Second and Third Claims for Relief in GEA's First Amended Complaint, filed December 3, 2009 [23], is denied.

Mr. Bell states he anticipates there may be designations of non-parties at fault. Court states that electronic discovery disputes may be referred to a magistrate judge or special mas t er. Counsel are preparing an electronic discovery order following Sedona priciples.

January 5, 2010 09-cv-02051-RPM Court advises counsel to comply with Local Rules 7.2 and 7.3 with respect to any proposed protective order. ORDERED: Status Conference scheduled August 12, 2010. Status report due August 5, 2010.

Mr. Bell states plaintiff withdraws its claim for declaratory judgment. ORDERED: ORDERED: Plaintiff's claim for declaratory judgment is withdrawn. Responsive pleadings are due by January 15, 2010.

Court instructs counsel to submit any proposed protective and electronic discovery orders in paper directly to chambers. ORDERED: Scheduling Order approved.

2:29 p.m. Court in recess.
Hearing concluded. Total time: 34 min.

2