Abreu v. Tavin Foods Inc.

Filing 20

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 13 Motion to Dismiss; denying without prejudice 16 Motion to Strike; granting 17 Motion to Stay, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 4/14/2016. Scheduling Conference set for 4/25/2016 is VACATED and RESCHEDULED to 7/13/2016 09:45 AM in Courtroom A 501 before Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty. (slibi, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 16-cv-00432-PAB-MEH
SANTIAGO ABREU,
Plaintiff,
v.
TAVIN FOODS, INC. d/b/a Riverbend Market & Eatery,
Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on April 14, 2016.
Before the Court are the pro se Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [filed April 7, 2016; docket
#13], Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [filed April 8, 2016; docket #16],
and Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Stay Action to Facilitate Settlement [filed April 8, 2016; docket
#17].
Plaintiff informs the Court in his motion to stay that the parties are attempting in good faith
to negotiate a resolution of this case. With this in mind and considering this District’s admonition
that “motions to strike are generally disfavored,”1 the Court finds it in the interests of justice to deny
without prejudice the motion to dismiss and motion to strike, and grant the unopposed motion to
stay the proceedings of this case (including the answer deadline) temporarily as follows.
The Scheduling Conference currently set for April 25, 2016 is vacated and rescheduled to
July 13, 2016 at 9:45 a.m. in Courtroom A-501, on the fifth floor of the Alfred A. Arraj United
States Courthouse located at 901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado. If this date is not convenient,
counsel should confer with opposing counsel and contact my Chambers to obtain an alternate date.
All parties must be present if they wish to change the date of the conference by telephone; otherwise,
any party seeking to change the conference date must file a motion. Absent exceptional
circumstances, no request for rescheduling will be entertained unless made five business days prior
to the date of the conference.
In addition, counsel for the parties and any unrepresented parties in this case are to hold a
meeting and jointly prepare a proposed Scheduling Order in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)
on or before July 1, 2016. All other aspects of this Court’s February 25, 2016 order remain in
effect.

1

Colo. Envtl. Coalition v. Office of Legacy Mgmt., 819 F. Supp. 2d 1193, 1202 (D. Colo.
2011) (quoting Resolution Trust Corp. v. Ascher, 839 F. Supp. 764, 765 (D. Colo. 1993)).

Should the parties come to a resolution before July 13, 2016, they shall inform the Court by
motion or notice of settlement. However, if they do not, the Court will discuss with the parties at
the Conference the re-setting of all deadlines.

2