Martin v. City and County of Denver

Filing 27

MINUTE ORDER. The 21 Plaintiff's Opposed (in part) Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint is denied without prejudice. The 23 Plaintiff's Unopposed (in part) Motion for Extension of Time to Amend Second Complaint is gran ted. Plaintiff shall file a Motion to Amend along with his proposed Second Amended Complaint on or before 10/25/2012. Scheduling Conference set for 1/10/2013 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom C204 before Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix. By Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 9/25/12.(mnfsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01376-PAB-KLM
FREDDIE K. MARTIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER,
DENNIS J. GALLAGHER, Office of the Auditor, in his Official Capacity,
AUDIT SERVICES OF AUDITOR’S OFFICE, and
CAREER SERVICE AUTHORITY,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Opposed (in part) Motion for Leave
to File Second Amended Complaint [Docket No. 21; Filed September 25, 2012] (the
“Motion to Amend”) and on Plaintiff’s Unopposed (in part) Motion for Extension of Time
to Amend Second Complaint [Docket No. 23; Filed September 25, 2012] (the “Motion to
Extend”).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Leave [#21] is DENIED without
prejudice. If Plaintiff, who proceeds in this matter pro se, is seeking leave to file an
Amended Complaint, he must file a motion which complies with the federal and local rules,
namely, Fed. R. Civ. P. 15, and which includes the proposed Amended Complaint as a
document separate from the Motion. The Court will not permit piecemeal adjudication of
Plaintiff’s case, thus Plaintiff must include all claims he seeks to bring and defendants he
intends to name in the proposed Amended Complaint.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Extend [#23] is GRANTED. Plaintiff
shall file a Motion to Amend along with his proposed Second Amended Complaint on or
before October 25, 2012. The Court will set a schedule for answers or other responsive
pleadings and for the exchange of initial disclosures pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)
after resolution of the Motion to Amend.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that the Scheduling/Planning Conference
-1-

set for October 11, 2012 at 11:00 a.m. is VACATED and RESET to January 10, 2013 at
10:30 a.m. in Courtroom C-204, Second Floor, Byron G. Rogers United States Courthouse,
1929 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado.
If this date is not convenient for any counsel/pro se party, he/she shall file a motion
to reschedule the conference to a more convenient date, and shall list dates in the motion
which are available for all counsel/pro se parties.
The plaintiff shall notify all parties who have not entered an appearance of the
date and time of the Scheduling/Planning Conference.
No later than five (5) calendar days prior to the Scheduling/Planning Conference,
counsel/pro se parties shall submit their proposed Scheduling Order in the format available
on the Court’s website at: www.cod.uscourts.gov under magistrate judges forms in
compliance with the Court’s Electronic Case Filing Procedures which are available on the
Court’s website.
All out-of-state counsel shall comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 83.3 before the
Scheduling/Planning Conference.
The parties shall comply with all other requirements in the Order Setting
Scheduling/Planning Conference [#15].

Dated: September 25, 2012

-2-