Winmark Corporation v. Schneeberger et al

Filing 48

ORDER STRIKING 47 Reply to Response to Motion filed by Todd A. Schneeberger, Patricia A. Schneeberger. Defendants are GRANTED an extension of time to file an Answer to the Complaint or other Responsive Pleading. Such pleading must be filed on or before December 13, 2013, by Judge William J. Martinez on 12/5/2013. (ervsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 13-cv-0274-WJM-BNB
WINMARK CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
v.
TODD A. SCHNEEBERGER, and
PATRICIA A. SCHNEEBERGER
Defendants.

ORDER STRIKING DEFENDANTS’ REPLY AND
GRANTING DEFENDANTS AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER

The matter is before the Court on the Reply filed by pro se Defendants Todd A.
Schneeberger and Patricia A. Schneeberger (“Defendants”) in support of their Motion to
Set Aside Clerk’s Entry of Default (“Reply”). (ECF No. 47). The Court has already
issued an Order granting Defendants’ Motion and setting aside the entry of default.
(ECF No. 46.) Accordingly, Defendants’ Reply shall be stricken.
However, it is apparent that Defendants’ Reply was filed because Defendants
misunderstood the portion of the Court’s Order in which they were directed to file an
Answer or Responsive Pleading on or before December 5, 2013. The Court’s Order
directed Defendants not to file a Reply to the Motion, but rather to file an Answer or
other pleading responding to Plaintiff’s Complaint. (See ECF No. 46 at 9.) An Answer
or Responsive Pleading must comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, must set
forth any defenses Defendants may have to each of Plaintiff's claims, and must either

admit or deny each allegation in the Complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)-(c).
Defendants’ deadline to file their Answer or Responsive Pleading was December
5, 2013, the date of this Order. Defendants appear to have intended their Reply, filed
on December 4, 2013, to satisfy the Court’s Order for them to file a responsive
pleading. As the Court’s Order remains unsatisfied due to Defendants’
misunderstanding, the Court hereby grants Defendants an extension of time to file their
Answer or Responsive Pleading.
For the foregoing reasons, the Court ORDERS as follows:
1.

Defendants’ Reply is STRICKEN; and

2.

Defendants are GRANTED an extension of time to file an Answer to the
Complaint or other Responsive Pleading. Such pleading must be filed on or
before December 13, 2013.
Finally, Defendants are put on notice that the Court has exhausted its patience

with regard to accommodating the seeming endless series of procedural and
substantive mishaps they have inflicted upon themselves in this litigation given their
lack of legal training and pro se status. Defendants are advised that if they persist in
defending this lawsuit without the assistance of legal counsel they will be subject to the
same exacting expectations as are represented parties appearing before this Court, in
regards, without limitation, to full compliance with all Court orders, deadlines and
procedures.

2

Dated this 5th day of December, 2013.
BY THE COURT:

William J. Martínez
United States District Judge

3