Under Armour, Inc. v. Hot Gear, LLC et al
MINUTE ORDER granting #15 Plaintiffs unopposed Motion to Vacate and Reset the Scheduling/Planning Conference; Scheduling Conference RESET for 8/19/2010 09:00 AM in Courtroom C203 before Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty. by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 7/16/2010.(erv, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 10-cv-01069-WYD-MEH UNDER ARMOUR, INC., Plaintiff, v. HOT GEAR, LLC, PETKOV ENT, and IVAN E. PETKOV, an individual, Defendants. MINUTE ORDER Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on July 16, 2010. Plaintiff's unopposed Motion to Vacate Scheduling Conference [filed July 15, 2010; docket #15] is granted. The Scheduling Conference set for July 22, 2010, is vacated and reset to August 19, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 203 on the second floor of the Byron G. Rogers United States Courthouse located at 1929 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado. The plaintiff shall notify all parties who have not entered an appearance of the date and time of the Scheduling Conference. Lawyers whose offices are located outside of the Denver metropolitan area may appear at scheduling conferences by telephone. Please contact Chambers at (303) 844-4507 at least five business days prior to the scheduling conference to arrange appearance by telephone. Lawyers appearing by telephone must ensure that the proposed Scheduling Order is filed electronically and by email no later than five business days prior to the scheduling conference, in accordance with the instructions in this minute order. It is further ORDERED that counsel for the parties in this case are to hold a pre-scheduling conference meeting and jointly prepare a proposed Scheduling Order in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) on or before August 5, 2010. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d), no discovery shall be submitted until after the pre-scheduling conference meeting, unless otherwise ordered or directed by the Court. The parties shall file the proposed Scheduling Order with the Clerk's Office, and in accordance with District of Colorado Electronic Case Filing ("ECF") Procedures V.L., no later than five (5) business days prior to the scheduling conference. The proposed Scheduling Order is also to be submitted in a useable format (i.e., Word or WordPerfect only) by email to Magistrate Judge Hegarty at Hegarty_Chambers@cod.uscourts.gov.
Parties not participating in ECF shall file their proposed Scheduling Order on paper with the clerk's office. However, if any party in this case is participating in ECF, it is the responsibility of that party to file the proposed scheduling order pursuant to the District of Colorado ECF Procedures. The parties shall prepare the proposed Scheduling Order in accordance with the form which may be downloaded in richtext format from the Standardized Order Forms section of the Court's website, found at http://www.co.uscourts.gov/forms_frame.htm. All Scheduling Conferences held before a Magistrate Judge utilize the same scheduling order format, regardless of the District Judge assigned to the case. Any out-of-state counsel shall comply with D.C. Colo. LCivR 83.3C prior to the Scheduling Conference. The parties are further advised that they shall not assume that the Court will grant the relief requested in any motion. Failure to appear at a Court-ordered conference or to comply with a Courtordered deadline which has not be vacated by Court order may result in the imposition of sanctions. Finally, the parties or counsel attending the Conference should be prepared to informally discuss settlement of the case. There is no requirement to submit confidential settlement documents/letters to the Court beforehand or to have parties present who shall have full authority to negotiate all terms and demands presented by the case. Please remember that anyone seeking entry into the Byron G. Rogers United States Courthouse will be required to show a valid photo identification. See D.C. Colo. LCivR 83.2B.
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?