Ramirez et al v. EZ Drop Polypiper Company et al

Filing 49

MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part 48 Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Leave to Conduct Jurisdictional Discovery Prior to Responding to Defendants' Motions to Dismiss. Discovery cutoff for jurisdictional discovery is 7/17/ 2014. Plaintiffs shall file responses to the pending motions to dismiss on or before 7/31/2014. Scheduling Conference reset for 7/24/2014 09:45 AM in Courtroom A 501 before Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 6/2/2014. (eseam)

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 June 2, 2014.
Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Leave to Conduct Jurisdictional Discovery Prior to
Responding to Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss and for Commensurate Extension of time to
Respond [filed May 30, 2014; docket #48] is granted in part and denied in part. The Court finds
good cause for a 45-day extension of time within which to conduct jurisdictional discovery and,
thus, the discovery cutoff for such discovery is July 17, 2014. Plaintiffs shall file responses to the
pending motions to dismiss on or before July 31, 2014.
Moreover, the Scheduling Conference currently set for July 10, 2014 is vacated and
rescheduled to July 24, 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. Absent exceptional
circumstances, no request for rescheduling will be entertained unless made five business days prior
to the date of the conference.
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 July 17, 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.
All other aspects of this Court’s May 30, 2014 order remain in effect.

2