Collins v. Trans Union, LLC et al

Filing 62

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 10/8/14. Defendant LexisNexis' Motion to Appear by Telephone 58 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendant Experian's Motion to Attend by Telephone 60 is DENIED. Because of the importance of the matters to be considered, all counsel who will address the court must appear at the hearing in person. If LexisNexis' Ohio counsel will monitor the proceedings only, but not participate, he may attend by telephone. To speak, however, a party or its counsel must be at the hearing in person. (bsimm, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland
Civil Action No. 14-cv-00742-RBJ-BNB
MICHAEL A. COLLINS,
Plaintiff,
v.
TRANS UNION, LLC,
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.,
EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES LLC, and
LEXISNEXIS RISK DATA RETRIEVAL SERVICES LLC, individually,
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
This matter arises on the following:
(1)

Defendant LexisNexis’ Motion to Appear by Telephone [Doc. # 58, filed

10/7/2014] (the “LexisNexis Motion”); and
(2)

Defendant Experian’s Motion to Attend by Telephone [Doc. # 60, filed

10/7/2014] (“Experian’s Motion”).
LexisNexis’ Motion [Doc. # 58] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as
explained below. Experian’s Motion [Doc. # 60] is DENIED.
LexisNexis is represented by counsel located in Denver and in Dayton, Ohio. Experian is
represented by counsel located in California. All out-of-state counsel seek leave to appear by
telephone at the hearing set for October 14, 2014, citing excessive cost and burden associated

with personal appearances.1
The October 14 hearing is an important one. In addition to a scheduling conference, I
also will hear argument (and may rule orally) on (1) LexisNexis’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. # 26];
(2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order [Doc. # 35]; (3) Plaintiff’s Motion to
Restrict Access [Doc. # 39]; (4) Plaintiff’s [Second] Motion to Restrict Access [Doc. # 41]; and
(5) Plaintiff’s Motion to File Surreply [Doc. # 55].
Because of the importance of the matters to be considered, all counsel who will address
the court must appear at the hearing in person. If LexisNexis’ Ohio counsel will monitor the
proceedings only, but not participate, he may attend by telephone. To speak, however, a party or
its counsel must be at the hearing in person.
SO ORDERED.
Dated October 8, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge

1

LexisNexis’ local counsel states that it will appear in person at the hearing on October
14, 2014.
2