Kolakowski v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al

Filing 24

MINUTE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 5/23/14. Motion to ModifyScheduling Order is Denied Without prejudice 22 .(lgale)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 13-cv-02682-RM-KLM MARK KOLAKOWSKI, Plaintiff, v. HARBOR FREIGHT TOOLS USA, INC., a Delaware corporation doing business as Harbor Freight Tools, and MATT DEFAZIO, an individual, Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________ MINUTE ORDER ______________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Modify Scheduling Order [#22] (the “Motion”). Plaintiff seeks an extension of the affirmative expert deadline, which occurred on May 15, 2014, for the sole purpose of allowing one expert, Ben T. Railsback (“Railsback”), to complete his expert report. According to D.C.COLO.LCivR 6.1(b), a motion for an extension of time shall state the length of the requested extension of time. However, it is unclear from the Motion how long of an extension will be required. Plaintiff states that “Mr. Railsback is unable to complete his evaluation of this case and complete his expert report until Defendants disclose information and documents requested in Plaintiff’s written discovery requests, specifically, Harbor Freight’s training, policy, and procedure manuals, incident reports, and Defendant Matt Defazio’s employee file.” Motion [#22] at 2. Plaintiff states that Defendants will not produce these items until a protective order is in place, although a proposed protective order has not yet been agreed on by the parties and submitted to the Court. Thus, although Plaintiff seeks an extension of the deadline until thirty days after production of the aforementioned discovery, the actual length of the extension sought by Plaintiff is indeterminable. Therefore, Plaintiff’s Motion violates D.C.COLO.LCivR 6.1(b). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#22] is DENIED without prejudice. Dated: May 23, 2014

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?