Margheim v. Buck et al

Filing 73

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 7/9/14. Plaintiff's Request/Notification 63 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Clerk of the Court shall mail to the plaintiff a copy of the local rules of thiscourt. Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 201(c)(2), and Proposed Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law 68 is DENIED. Plaintiff's Request for Admissions Rule 36 70 is DENIED. (bsimm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01520-WJM-BNB
TERRY MARGHEIM,
Plaintiff,
v.
EMELA BULJKO, DDA,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
This matter arises on the following papers filed by the plaintiff:
(1) Plaintiff’s Request/Notification [Doc. #63, filed 06/17/2014] (the
“Request/Notification”);
(2) Plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence
Rule 201(c)(2), and Proposed Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law [Doc. #68, filed
06/26/2014] (the “Request for Judicial Notice”); and
(3) Plaintiff’s Request for Admissions Rule 36 [Doc. #70, filed 07/01/2014] (the
“Request for Admissions”).
In his Request/Notification, the plaintiff requests (1) an order directing the Clerk of the
Court to send him a copy of the local rules of the court; (2) the court note his change of address;
(3) the court note a typographical error in the proposed second amended complaint; (4) the court
direct the defendant to respond to his proposed second amended complaint; and (5) the defendant

“look at the court records in Weld County Combined Courts . . . before denying any claim that
cannot be disputed by the record.”
The plaintiff’s request for a copy of the local rules is granted, and his change of address
has been noted in the record. By separate recommendation, I have recommended that the
plaintiff’s motion to amend the Amended Complaint be denied. The typographical error has no
bearing on my recommendation. Therefore, the plaintiff’s requests to note the typographical
error and require the defendant to respond to the proposed second amended complaint are denied
as moot. The plaintiff’s request that the defendant view Weld County court records is improper.
If the plaintiff wishes to bring court documents to the defendant’ attention, he may include the
documents in a proper brief or he may share the documents with the defendant during the
discovery process. The court will not order the defendant to view the records.
The plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice asks the court take judicial notice of two Weld
County Court cases and several documents. He also submits “proposed findings of facts” and
“proposed conclusions of law.” He requests that the court “take notice of the undisputable facts
and make conclusions of law and consider entering an order pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure Rule 56(f)(3).”
Rule 56(f)(3) provides that “[a]fter giving notice and a reasonable time to respond, the
court may . . . consider summary judgment on its own after identifying for the parties material
facts that may not be genuinely in dispute.” I decline the plaintiff’s request to consider entry of
summary judgment sua sponte under Rule 56(f)(3). The Request for Judicial Notice is DENIED.
The plaintiff’s Request for Admissions is improper. A Scheduling Conference has not
been held, and discovery has not yet commenced. Therefore, the plaintiff’s discovery requests

2

are premature. In addition, once discovery commences, the plaintiff may not file discovery
materials with the court. Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(d). Discovery requests must be served on the defendant
in accordance with the federal rules.
IT IS ORDERED:
(1) Plaintiff’s Request/Notification [Doc. #63] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED
IN PART;
(2) The Clerk of the Court shall mail to the plaintiff a copy of the local rules of this
court;
(3) The plaintiff’s requests that the court note a typographical error in the proposed
second amended complaint and require the defendant to respond to the proposed second
amended complaint are DENIED;
(4) The plaintiff’s request that the court ask defendant to view Weld County court
records is DENIED;
(5) Plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice Pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence Rule
201(c)(2), and Proposed Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law [Doc. #68] is DENIED; and
(6) Plaintiff’s Request for Admissions Rule 36 [Doc. #70] is DENIED.
Dated July 9, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge

3