Raguindin et al v. Yates et al

Filing 42

MINUTE ORDER; 36 Defendants Reams and Wood's Amended Motion for Relief from the Court's May 15, 2015 Minute Order is GRANTED. 31 Defendants Reams and Woods Motion for Relief From Courts May 15, 2015 Minute Order is DENIED as moot. Defendants Reams and Wood shall respond to the Second Amended Complaint [#22] on or before July 13, 2015, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 6/9/15.(morti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 15-cv-00635-CMA-KLM
JOEL RAGUINDIN, and
JENNA FOX,
Plaintiffs,
v.
MICHAEL YATES, individually,
JASON PHIPPS, individually,
MIKE PARKOS, individually,
PATRICK HAUGSE, individually,
CHIEF OF POLICE RICK BRANDT, in his official capacity,
WELD COUNTY SHERIFF STEVEN REAMS, individually and in his official capacity, and
PAUL WOOD, individually,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Defendants Reams and Wood’s Motion for
Relief From Court’s May 15, 2015 Minute Order [#31]1 (the “First Motion”) and
Defendants Reams and Wood’s Amended Motion for Relief From the Court’s May 15,
2015 Minute Order [#36] (the “Second Motion”).
The First Motion is superceded by the Second Motion, which corrected a date.
Accordingly, the First Motion [#31] is moot.
The Second Motion is unopposed. Second Motion [#36] at 1. In the Motion, the
moving Defendants argue that because they did not waive service until after the Second
Amended Complaint was filed, their deadline to respond to the Second Amended
Complaint is governed by Fed R. Civ. P. 4(d)(3) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(ii). As a
result, they argue that the deadline for all Defendants to respond to the Second Amended

1

“[#31]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to
a specific paper by the Court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I
use this convention throughout this Minute Order.

1

Complaint set by the Court, Minute Order [#21] at 2, should be modified as to these two
Defendants. Second Motion [#36] at 1-2.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the First Motion [#31] is DENIED as moot and the
Second Motion [#36] is GRANTED. Defendants Reams and Wood shall respond to the
Second Amended Complaint [#22] on or before July 13, 2015.
Dated: June 9, 2015

2