Myers v. Koopman

Filing 274

ORDER denying 271 Motion for Status Conference & striking 273 Motion for Summary Judgment. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 2/13/2014.(klyon, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Case No. 09-cv-02802-REB-MEH
JEREMY C. MYERS,
Plaintiff,
v.
BRIAN KOOPMAN, Detective in the Loveland, Colorado Police department, in his official and
individual capacity,
Defendant.

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR STATUS CONFERENCE
& STRIKING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Blackburn, J.
This matter is before me on the following: (1) Plaintiff’s Motion To Set Status
Conference Following Remand [#271]1 filed February 12, 2014; and (2) the Defendant’s
Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment [#273] filed February 12, 2014. The defendant filed
a response [#272] to the motion for status conference. I deny the motion for status conference
and strike the motion for summary judgment because it was not timely filed.
Following the remand [#269] of the Tenth Circuit, this court is tasked initially with
reviewing the arguments of the defendant, Brian Koopman, concerning absolute and qualified
immunity. Those arguments were asserted previously in Mr. Koopman’s motion to dismiss
[#128] and his motion for summary judgment [#230]. Nothing indicates the parties did not have
an adequate opportunity to brief these issues in the context of those two motions. To facilitate
consideration of the arguments concerning absolute and qualified immunity, I will reconsider the

1

“[#271]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

extant arguments of the parties.
The dispositive motions deadline expired on September 24, 2012. Nothing in the record
demonstrates a need for further briefing on the dispositive motions filed previously in this case.
Absent a demonstrated need for further briefing, the court will not extend the dispositive motions
deadline or accept further untimely dispositive motions from the parties. On that basis, the
Defendant’s Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment [#273] filed February 12, 2014,
respectfully is stricken because it was filed long after the expiration of the dispositive motions
deadline.
Given these circumstances, there is no demonstrated need to conduct a status
conference. The court will address in a written order the issues of absolute immunity and
qualified immunity. Following that order, the court will set further proceedings, if necessary,
including a Trial Preparation Conference and a trial.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the Plaintiff’s Motion To Set Status Conference Following Remand [#271]
filed February 12, 2014, is DENIED; and
2. That the Defendant’s Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment [#273] filed
February 12, 2014, respectfully is STRICKEN because it was filed long after the expiration of
the dispositive motions deadline.
Dated February 13, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

2