Smith v. Town of Kremmling, Colorado et al

Filing 22

ORDER Granting 21 Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order. The party bearing the burden of persuasion on issues for which expert opinion is to be offered shall designate the expert and provide opposing counsel with all info rmation specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) on or before February 12, 2016. The parties shall designate all contradicting experts and provide opposing counsel with all information specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) on or before March 11, 2016, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 1/15/16. (ktera)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No.: 15-cv-00459-RPM
ROBERT MARK SMITH,
Plaintiff,
v.
TOWN OF KREMMLING, COLORADO, et al.,
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
UPON Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order, the Court, being
fully advised in the premises and for good cause shown, hereby:
GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion. The expert disclosure deadlines in the Scheduling Order
entered in this matter shall be extended as follows:


The party bearing the burden of persuasion on issues for which expert opinion is

to be offered shall designate the expert and provide opposing counsel with all information
specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) on or before February 12, 2016


The parties shall designate all contradicting experts and provide opposing counsel

with all information specified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) on or before March 11, 2016
DATED: January 15, 2016
BY THE COURT
s/Richard P. Matsch
_________________________________
Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge