Shamayev v. Owners Insurance Company
ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND SETTING SCHEDULING/PLANNING CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang on 2/8/16. The court finds that the Parties have complied with the directives set out in the Order to Show Cause. Accordingly, the Order to Show Cause 9 is DISCHARGED. A Scheduling Conference is set for 3/8/2016 09:00 AM in Courtroom C204 before Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang. The parties shall submit their proposed scheduling order, including a copy of the proposed scheduling order in a Word format sent via email to Wang_Chambers@cod.uscourts.gov, on or before 3/1/2016. (bsimm, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 16-cv-00121-WJM-NYW
OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY,
ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND SETTING
Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang
This matter comes before the court sua sponte pursuant to the Order Referring Case dated
February 4, 2016 [#13].
DISCHARGE OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
On February 1, 2016, this court issued an Order to Show Cause directing Defendant
Owners Insurance Company (“Owners”) to show cause in writing on or before February 8, 2016
why this case should not be remanded to state court due to Owners’ failure to file “a copy of all
process, pleadings, and orders served upon such defendant or defendants in [the state court]
action,” as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a). [#9]. The parties were also directed to file the
Consent/Nonconsent Form indicating whether they unanimously consented to the jurisdiction of
a Magistrate Judge in this case on or before February 8, 2016.
Following entry of the Order to Show Cause, on February 1, 2016, Owners filed copies of
all pleadings in the state court action. [#10]. On February 4, 2016, Plaintiff David Shamayev
filed the Consent/Nonconsent Form indicating that all parties did not consent to the jurisdiction
of a Magistrate Judge.
The case was then reassigned to the Honorable William J.
Martinez, see [#12], and he issued an Order referring the case to the undersigned Magistrate
Judge to conduct non-dispositive proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), see [#12].
The court finds that the Parties have complied with the directives set out in the Order to
Show Cause. Accordingly, the Order to Show Cause [#9] is DISCHARGED.
RULE 16(b) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
The court shall hold a Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) scheduling and planning conference on:
March 8, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.
in Courtroom C-204, 2d Floor, Byron G. Rogers United States Courthouse, 1929 Stout Street,
Denver, Colorado. Please remember that anyone seeking entry into the Byron G. Rogers United
States Courthouse will be required to show valid photo identification. See D.C.COLO.LCivR
A copy of the instructions for the preparation of a scheduling order and a form of
scheduling order can be downloaded from the court’s website at www.cod.uscourts.gov. The
parties or their counsel shall submit their proposed scheduling order, pursuant to District of
Colorado Electronic Case Filing (“ECF”) Procedures V.6.0, including a copy of the proposed
scheduling order in a Word format sent via email to Wang_Chambers@cod.uscourts.gov, on or
before seven days prior to the Scheduling Conference:
March 1, 2016
The parties shall hold a pre-scheduling conference meeting and prepare a proposed
Scheduling Order in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.1 and
26.1(a) on or before:
21 days prior to scheduling conference
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d), no discovery will be deemed served until at least the prescheduling conference meeting contemplated by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f).
The parties shall comply with the mandatory disclosure requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P.
26(a)(1) on or before:
14 days after the pre-scheduling conference meeting.
DATED: February 8, 2016
BY THE COURT:
s/ Nina Y. Wang
United States Magistrate Judge
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?