Sladek et al v. Bank of America, N.A. et al

Filing 22

MINUTE ORDER granting 20 Motion to Clarify. The Scheduling Conference currently set for April 1, 2014 is vacated and rescheduled to May 15, 2014 at 9:45 a.m before Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 03/19/14.(jhawk, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-03094-PAB-MEH
DIANA SLADEK and
DENNIS SLADEK,
Plaintiffs,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,
ARONOWITZ & MECKLENBURG,
THOMAS MOWLE, and
MERS, a division of MERSCORP,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on March 19, 2014.
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Clarification [filed March 18, 2014; docket #20] is granted as follows.
The docket in this case shows that Plaintiffs were ordered to provide information for service of
process by the U.S. Marshal on or before January 8, 2014 (docket #13); however, they did not
provide such information until February 25, 2014 (docket #14). The Court immediately arranged
for service and has received returns of service for Defendants Bank of America, N.A., Aronowitz
& Mecklenberg and MERS reflecting that these Defendants were served on March 10, 2014.
Because these Defendants have not yet appeared and have 21 days within which to file answers or
other responses to the Amended Complaint, the Court will continue the Scheduling Conference to
allow the parties to confer in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f).
Accordingly, the Scheduling Conference currently set for April 1, 2014 is vacated and
rescheduled to May 15, 2014 at 9:45 a.m. in Courtroom A-501, on the fifth floor of the Alfred A.
Arraj United States Courthouse located at 901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado. If this date is not
convenient, the parties should confer with the parties and contact my Chambers to obtain an
alternate date. Absent exceptional circumstances, no request for rescheduling will be entertained
unless made five business days prior to the date of the conference.
The plaintiff shall notify all parties who have not entered an appearance of the date and time
of the Scheduling Conference.
Lawyers whose offices are located outside of the Denver metropolitan area may appear at
scheduling conferences by telephone. Please contact Chambers at [phone] at least five

business days prior to the scheduling conference to arrange appearance by telephone. Lawyers
appearing by telephone must ensure that the proposed Scheduling Order is filed electronically and
by email no later than five business days prior to the scheduling conference, in accordance with the
instructions in this minute order.
It is further ORDERED that counsel for the parties in this case are to hold a pre-scheduling
conference meeting and jointly prepare a proposed Scheduling Order in accordance with Fed. R.
Civ. P. 26(f) on or before April 24, 2014. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d), no discovery shall be
submitted until after the pre-scheduling conference meeting, unless otherwise ordered or directed
by the Court.
The parties shall file the proposed Scheduling Order with the Clerk’s Office, and in
accordance with District of Colorado Electronic Case Filing (“ECF”) Procedures V.L., no later than
five (5) business days prior to the scheduling conference. The proposed Scheduling Order is also
to be submitted in a useable format (i.e., Word or WordPerfect only) by email to Magistrate
Judge Hegarty at [e-mail].
Parties not participating in ECF shall file their proposed Scheduling Order on paper with the
clerk’s office. However, if any party in this case is participating in ECF, it is the responsibility of
that party to file the proposed scheduling order pursuant to the District of Colorado ECF Procedures.
The parties shall prepare the proposed Scheduling Order in accordance with the form
which may be downloaded from the Standardized Order Forms section of the Court’s website,
found at http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/Forms.aspx. All Scheduling Conferences held before a
Magistrate Judge utilize the same scheduling order format, regardless of the District Judge assigned
to the case.
Any out-of-state counsel shall comply with D.C. Colo. LAttyR 3 prior to the Scheduling
Conference.
The parties are further advised that they shall not assume that the Court will grant the relief
requested in any motion. Failure to appear at a Court-ordered conference or to comply with a Courtordered deadline which has not be vacated by Court order may result in the imposition of sanctions.
Finally, the parties or counsel attending the Conference should be prepared to informally
discuss the case to determine whether an early neutral evaluation is appropriate. There is no
requirement to submit confidential position statements/letters to the Court at the Scheduling
Conference or to have parties present who have full authority to negotiate all terms and demands
presented by the case.
Anyone seeking entry into the Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse will be
required to show a valid photo identification. See D.C. Colo. LCivR 83.2(b).

2