Muragara, v. MacKenzie Place, The-Colorado Springs, Employer.,
Filing
15
ORDER: Scheduling Conference re-set for 8/9/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom A 401 before Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland. Parties to conventionally file a proposed Second Supplemental Scheduling Order on or before 8/2/12 with initials on each page and signature on final page. by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 7/9/12. (bnbcd, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00891-MSK-BNB
JECKONIAS N. MURAGARA,
Plaintiff,
v.
MACKENZIE PLACE UNION, LLC, d/b/a The Mackenzie Place - Colorado Springs,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
The parties appeared today for a supplemental scheduling conference. The proposed
supplemental Scheduling Order is REFUSED. A second supplemental scheduling conference is
set for August 9, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., in Courtroom 401, 4th floor, Alfred A. Arraj United States
Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado.
At the first scheduling conference, the plaintiff had failed to participate in the preparation
of the proposed scheduling order, and the proposed scheduling order submitted by the defendant
did not contain the information required from the plaintiff. Consequently, I ordered the parties
to cooperate in the preparation of a proposed supplemental scheduling order in the form of
Appendix F.1 to the local rules of practice, D.C.COLO.LCivR., and to submit the proposed
supplemental scheduling order on or before June 29, 2012. I set a supplemental scheduling
conference for this morning.
The parties appeared as ordered, but there was confusion concerning the proposed
supplemental scheduling order. One copy, conventionally filed and scanned into the court’s
CM/ECF system, contained the plaintiff’s handwritten signature. A second copy, filed by the
defendant electronically, appeared to be substantively identical to the conventionally filed
version but contained different formatting. The parties could not agree about the events leading
up to the filing of the two versions of the scheduling order, and the plaintiff challenged the
accuracy of the version filed electronically.
It is apparent to me that the plaintiff and defense counsel refuse to work together
cooperatively to achieve even the most basic tasks necessary for the case to proceed--preparation
of a scheduling order. This is unacceptable and cannot continue.
IT IS ORDERED:
(1)
The proposed scheduling orders submitted in anticipation of today’s supplemental
scheduling conference are REFUSED.
(2)
On or before August 2, 2012, the parties shall file conventionally a proposed
Second Supplemental Scheduling Order, bearing the handwritten signatures of the plaintiff and
defense counsel, and with every page of the proposed Second Supplemental Scheduling Order
initialed in handwriting by the plaintiff and defense counsel. Under no circumstances should any
form of competing or conflicting scheduling order be submitted by either party nor any challenge
be made to the authenticity of the signed and initialed proposed Second Supplemental
Scheduling Order.
(3)
A second supplemental scheduling conference is set for August 9, 2012, at 9:00
a.m., in Courtroom 401, 4th floor, Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse, 901 19th Street,
Denver, Colorado.
2
Dated July 9, 2012.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge
3
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?