Sherwin-Williams Company, The v. Ideal Auto Body Inc
MINUTE ORDER; 31 Joint Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order is GRANTED in part, as follows. Discovery due by 5/2/2016. Dispositive Motions due by 6/2/2016. In the absence of resetting the Jury Trial in this matter, the Court will not permitfurther extensions of time of the dispositive motions deadline, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 2/11/16.(morti, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 15-cv-00968-KLM
THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COMPANY, an Ohio corporation doing business as SherwinWilliams Automotive Finishes,
IDEAL AUTO BODY INC., a Colorado corporation doing business as Ideal Carstar, and
SHEILA SAMUEL, individually,
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ Joint Motion to Amend the
Scheduling Order [#31] (the “Motion”). The parties seek a 90-day extension of all
remaining deadlines in this matter in light of a planned February 25, 2016 “settlement
discussion” which the parties are “optimistic” will lead to the settlement of this matter.
However, given that the Final Pretrial Conference and Trial Preparation Conference are set
for August 22, 2016, and a Jury Trial is set to begin on September 26, 2016, a 90-day
extension of all deadlines will not permit adequate time for briefing and resolution of
dispositive motions in the absence of resetting the Conferences and Trial. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#31] is GRANTED in part, as follows.
The rebuttal expert disclosure deadline is extended to March 28, 2016. The discovery cutoff is extended to May 2, 2016. The dispositive motions deadline is extended to June 2,
2016. In the absence of resetting the Jury Trial in this matter, the Court will not permit
further extensions of time of the dispositive motions deadline.
Dated: February 11, 2016
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?