Dines v. Toys "R" Us, Inc.

Filing 141

ORDER denying 126 Motion to Modify Scheduling Order to Postpone Pretrial Conference Pending Resolution of Summary Judgment and Daubert Motions, by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 6/30/14.(sgrim)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
Civil Action No. 12BcvB02279BPABBKMT

KATHERINE DINES, an individual,
Plaintiff,
v.
TOYS AR@ US - DELAWARE, INC., a Delaware corporation,
Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the court on “Motion to Modify Scheduling Order to Postpone
Pretrial Conference Pending Resolution of Summary Judgment and Daubert Motions” [Doc. No.
126]. A response [Doc. No. 131] and a reply [133] have been filed and reviewed by the court.
Defendant seeks continuance of the final pretrial conference and entry of a final pretrial
order on the basis that there are a number of outstanding motions, including a motion for summary
judgment, which have not yet been fully briefed and which will likely not be ruled on within the
next several months, much less before the currently set final pretrial conference. Defendant
argues that the complexion of the case may change considerably depending on the court’s rulings
on outstanding motions. Defendant urges the court to delay the final pretrial conference until
after rulings on the outstanding motions so that the final pretrial order can be based on a more
accurate posture of the case.

In this District final pretrial conferences are usually held approximately sixty days after the
dispositive motions deadline, virtually guaranteeing that no ruling on those motions will have been
rendered prior to the entry of the final pretrial order.1 Nonetheless, litigants are expected to
prepare the final pretrial order and attend the final pretrial conference where they usually will
receive a trial setting. Generally, there is a significant amount of time between the entry of the
final pretrial order and the trial date during which all remaining pretrial issues, including ruling on
dispositive motions, will be resolved.
Under the standard procedures, a delay in entry of the final pretrial conference will result in
a concomitant extension of the trial setting. This case was filed on August 27, 2012 so is already
almost two years old. A further delay in setting the matter for trial is not warranted. The
defendant has provided no compelling reason to delay the entry of the final pretrial order or to
continue the final pretrial conference currently set for July 8, 2014 at 10:00 a.m.
It is ORDERED
Defendant’s “Motion to Modify Scheduling Order to Postpone Pretrial Conference
Pending Resolution of Summary Judgment and Daubert Motions” [Doc. No. 126] is DENIED.
Dated this 30th day of June, 2014.

1

This is not a uniform practice and several District Judges do not set final pretrial conferences
until after ruling on the dispositive motions. This procedure, however, is the exception rather
than the rule.
[2]