Continental Materials Corporation v. Affiliated FM Insurance Company

Filing 79

MINUTE ORDER granting 75 Stipulated MOTION to Extend Deadline and denying without prejudice 76 MOTION to Strike. Discovery due by 7/3/2012, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 6/21/12. (sgrim)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 10-cv-02900-JLK-KLM
CONTINENTAL MATERIALS CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
v.
AFFILIATED FM INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
______________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ Stipulated Motion to Extend
Deadline for Expert Witness Depositions and Deadlines for Response and Reply
Briefs to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 75; Filed June 19,
2012] (the “Motion to Extend”) and Defendant’s opposed Motion to Strike Late-filed
Expert Disclosure and for Sanctions [Docket No. 76; Filed June 19, 2012] (the “Motion
to Strike”).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Extend [#75] is GRANTED.
Accordingly,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Stipulated Scheduling and Discovery Order
entered on March 11, 2011 [#14], as amended on July 12, 2011 [#23], September 13, 2011
[#31], October 25, 2011 [#38], January 5, 2012 [#41], January 22, 2012 [#44], and June 7,
2012 [#73] is further modified to reflect the following new deadline:
•

Deadline for Completion of Expert Discovery

July 3, 2012

The deadline is extended for the sole purpose of permitting the parties to complete expert
depositions.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a Response to Defendant’s Motion
for Summary Judgment [#74] on or before July 13, 2012. Defendant shall file a Reply on
or before July 31, 2012.

-1-

Turning to the Motion to Strike [#76], Defendant represents that Plaintiff opposes the
requested relief. Pursuant to the Minute Order [#15] issued on March 14, 2011, the Motion
is premature. The Minute Order provides as follows:
No opposed discovery motions are to be filed with the Court until the parties
comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A. If the parties are unable to reach
agreement on a discovery issue after conferring, they shall arrange a
conference call with Magistrate Judge Mix to attempt to resolve the issue.
The parties shall initiate a conference call and then, once all parties are on
the line, dial the Court at 303-335-2770. Both of these steps must be
completed before any contested discovery motions are filed with the
Court.
Minute Order [#15] at 1. Defendant has not arranged a conference call to set a hearing
regarding the instant discovery dispute. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Strike [#76] is DENIED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that neither party shall file a contested discovery motion
until after complying with the steps for following the Magistrate Judge’s discovery dispute
procedure, as stated below:
Step 1: Counsel meaningfully confer regarding one or more discovery disputes
pursuant to Local Rule 7.1A. Counsel may choose to confer about only one dispute
at a time or several disputes at once. This decision is up to counsel, not the Court.
Step 2: If discovery disputes are not resolved, counsel then agree on a mutually
convenient time to call the Court at [phone] for a discovery hearing
regarding all disputes about which they have fully conferred but failed to reach
agreement.
No attorney can insist on contacting the Court for a discovery hearing at a time
when another attorney is not available. If an attorney is not available for a
conference call to the Court for a discovery hearing when contacted by opposing
counsel, s/he must provide opposing counsel with alternate dates and times to
contact the Court. This eliminates the possibility that one party will have an unfair
advantage over another in preparation for a discovery hearing.
The Court is not responsible for assuring that multiple counsel for the same party
are on the line for a telephone hearing. The Court requires only one attorney of
record on the line for each party involved in the dispute. If counsel for a party want
co-counsel for the same party to participate in the telephone hearing, they are
responsible for ensuring that co-counsel are available to participate on the date and
-2-

time chosen by them for the hearing.
The Court will not continue hearings based on the sudden unavailability of
co-counsel for a party. As long as each party involved in the dispute is represented
by at least one attorney of record, the hearing will proceed.
Step 3: When counsel call the Court for the discovery hearing, the judge’s law clerks
will ask counsel questions relating to the nature of the dispute. The law clerks will
consult with the judge as necessary. If the judge determines that any documents are
required for review prior to the hearing, counsel will be instructed to email such
documents to the Court’s chambers, and the hearing will be set at a mutually
convenient date and time in the future.
Step 4: If no documents are necessary for review and the judge is immediately
available, the call will be transferred to the courtroom and the hearing will be
conducted. If the judge determines that the matter is complex and briefing is
required, the judge will set a briefing schedule. If the judge is not immediately
available, the hearing will be set at a mutually convenient date and time in the future.
Dated: June 21, 2012

-3-