Sanderson v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc et al

Filing 63

MINUTE ORDER denying 61 Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Vacate Order of April 22, 2013 Doc. 60 and Re-Set Settlement Conference for April 27, 2015, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 4/24/2015.(evana, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-01630-WYD-KLM
HAROLD SANDERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.,
EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC,
TRANS UNION LLC, and
LIBERTY SAVINGS BANK, F.S.B.,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Vacate Order
of April 22, 2013 (Doc. 60) and Re-Set Settlement Conference for April 27, 2015 [#61]
(the “Motion”). Plaintiff asks the Court to reinstate a settlement conference which the Court
vacated because of Plaintiff’s confusion and misstatements about the status of settlement
efforts in the case. See Order [#60]. Plaintiff asserts that vacating the settlement
conference “will impose significant burdens on the parties.” However, Plaintiff admits that
he has not reached a final settlement with Defendant TransUnion LLC and asks the Court
to “excuse” TransUnion from participating in the settlement conference.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#61] is DENIED. The Court’s Order
vacating the settlement conference was due entirely to Plaintiff’s counsel's carelessness,
manifested by his filing of inconsistent pleadings containing incomplete or inaccurate
information about the status of settlement efforts in the case. Proceeding with a settlement
conference between Plaintiff and Defendant Liberty Savings Bank, F.S.B. (“Liberty”) alone
will not be economical or efficient for the Court, because it cannot result in full and final
settlement of the case. The Court declines to spend time attempting to steer Plaintiff and
Liberty toward a resolution of their dispute under these circumstances. Furthermore, to the
extent that the Motion is unopposed, Liberty is apparently anxious to participate in the
conference, and the parties seek to avoid “significant burdens” that allegedly will result from
not having a settlement conference on April 27, 2015, the Court suggests that the lawyers
use the available time and their best professional judgment to try to resolve the case
themselves.
Dated: April 24, 2015
-1-