Chung v. Lamb et al

Filing 22

MINUTE ORDER; 20 Second Status Report and Motion toExtend Deadline for Proposed Scheduling Order and Resetting of SchedulingConference is GRANTED. Scheduling Conference set for 9/16/2015 10:00 AM is VACATED and RESET to 9/23/2015 10:00 AM in Cour troom A 401 before Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix.The parties shall submit the proposed scheduling order no later than September 16, 2015. No further extensions of this deadline will be granted absent exceptional cause, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 9/14/15.(morti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-03244-KLM
EMILY BOSCOE CHUNG,
Plaintiff,
v.
TIMOTHY J. LAMB, and
TIMOTHY J. LAMB, P.C.,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Second Status Report and Motion to
Extend Deadline for Proposed Scheduling Order and Resetting of Scheduling
Conference [#20] (the “Motion”). Plaintiff also filed a Notice of Error [#21] with respect to
the Motion [#20]. Despite the imminence of the Scheduling Conference set for September
16, 2015, and Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendants oppose the Motion, Defendants have not
filed a Response.
It is unclear why the parties were unable to timely file the proposed scheduling order,
which was due on September 9, 2015. It is equally unclear why Defendants’ counsel
(according to Plaintiff’s counsel) “asserted that in practice the parties were not required to
comply” with the deadline to file the proposed scheduling order. Motion [#20] at 1. The
Court is also puzzled by Plaintiff’s assertion that the timing of the filing of the proposed
scheduling order should somehow be premised on or altered by the briefing schedule of
the Motion to Dismiss [#18]. Id. at 3. Finally, the Court rejects Plaintiff’s suggestion that
the Court might accept submission of the proposed scheduling order at the Scheduling
Conference itself, as this does not permit the Court to review the document in order to
discuss with the parties any necessary revisions. Id. at 5. Regardless, the Court will briefly
continue the Scheduling Conference in order to allow the parties time to submit the
proposed scheduling order.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#20] is GRANTED. Accordingly,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Scheduling Conference set for September 16,
-1-

2015 at 10:00 a.m. is VACATED and RESET to September 23, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. in
Courtroom A-401 of the Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver,
Colorado.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit their proposed scheduling
order pursuant to the District of Colorado Electronic Case Filing (“ECF”) Procedures. The
parties shall submit the proposed scheduling order no later than September 16, 2015. No
further extensions of this deadline will be granted absent exceptional cause.

Dated: September 14, 2015

-2-