Ramirez et al v. EZ Drop Polypiper Company et al

Filing 47

MINUTE ORDER granting 46 The Baugher Defendants' Unopposed Motion to Vacate and Reset Scheduling Conference. Scheduling Conference set for 7/10/2014 at 10:45 AM in Courtroom A 501 before Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty. By Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 5/30/2014. (cpear)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 14-cv-00881-MEH JUANITA RAMIREZ, by her conservator and next friend, J.R., a minor, and MARIA BARRAZA, by her guardian and next friend, Plaintiffs, PINNOCOL ASSURANCE, Plaintiff-Intervenor, v. EZ DROP POLYPIPER COMPANY, an Arkansas corporation, BAUGHER FARMS, INC., an Arkansas corporation, STEVE BAUGHER, L.L.C., an Arkansas limited liability company, STEVE BAUGHER, individually, HOOD & COMPANY, INC., a Missouri corporation, and STEVE HOOD, individually, Defendants. MINUTE ORDER Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on May 30, 2014. The Baugher Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Vacate and Reset Scheduling Conference [filed May 30, 2014; docket #46] is granted. The Scheduling Conference currently set for June 19, 2014 is vacated and rescheduled to July 10, 2014 at 10:45 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. Absent exceptional circumstances, no request for rescheduling will be entertained unless made five business days prior to the date of the conference. Lawyers whose offices are located outside of the Denver metropolitan area may appear at scheduling conferences by telephone. Please contact Chambers at (303) 844-4507 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 June 19, 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. On or before June 20, 2014, the parties shall complete and file the Pilot Program Consent Form (see docket # 3), indicating either unanimous consent of the parties or that consent has been declined. Please note that this date is earlier than the default deadlines contemplated by the Pilot Program. 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 Hegarty_Chambers@cod.uscourts.gov. 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 Court-ordered deadline which has not been 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

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?