Supreme Cable Technology, Inc. v. InLand Technologies Holdings, LLC et al

Filing 27

MINUTE ENTRY for Status Conference held before Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak on 2/28/2017; 12 Plaintiffs Request for a Hearing or Ruling on Plaintiffs Pending Noticeof Discovery Dispute, Regarding January 26, 2017 Order CompellingDisclosu re is GRANTED. 13 Defendants Motion for Protective Order Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 26(c) is DENIED as moot. 19 Defendants Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint is DENIED as moot. 20 Defendants Second and Final Motion for Extension o f Time to Respond to Complaint is DENIED as moot. 22 Defendants Forthwith Motion to Modify the Protective Order or in theAlternative for Leave to Designate Certain Materials Attorneys EyesOnly shall remain pending. The Clerk of Court shall remove t he restriction level of the motion. 23 Plaintiffs Notice of Discovery Dispute, Regarding January 26, 2017 Order Compelling Disclosure is DENIED without prejudice. 25 Motion for Leave to Restrict is GRANTED. 26 shall remain under Level 1 Restriction. Status Conference set for 4/7/2017 10:30 AM in Courtroom C205 before Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. Hearing concluded. FTR: STV - C205. (morti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
MAGISTRATE JUDGE SCOTT T. VARHOLAK
Civil Action: 17-cv-00457-STV
Date: February 28, 2017

FTR - Reporter Deck - Courtroom C205
Courtroom Deputy: Monique Ortiz

Parties:

Counsel:

SUPREME CABLE TECHNOLOGY, INC.

Leigh Holland Singleton (by phone)

Plaintiff,
v.
INLAND TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS,
LLC
RICK SCHMIDT, SR.
RICK SCHMIDT, JR.
DURHAM COMMERCIAL CAPITAL
CORPORATION

Lauren Elizabeth Mosse Thompson
Douglas W. Lambalot

Defendant,

COURTROOM MINUTES/MINUTE ORDER
HEARING: STATUS CONFERENCE
Court in session: 1:59 p.m.
Court calls case. Appearance of counsel.
This matter is before the court regarding the following pending Motions: Plaintiff’s Request
for a Hearing or Ruling on Plaintiff’s Pending Notice of Discovery Dispute, Regarding
January 26, 2017 Order Compelling Disclosure [Doc. No. 12, filed 2/23/2017]; Defendants’
Motion for Protective Order Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 26(c) [Doc. No. 13, filed 2/23/2017];
Defendants’ Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint [Doc. No. 19,
2/24/2017]; Defendants’ Second and Final Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to
Complaint [Doc. No. 20, filed 2/24/2017]; Plaintiff’s Motion Seeking Leave of Court to
Amend the Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 21, filed 2/24/2017]; Defendants’ Forthwith
Motion to Modify the Protective Order or in the Alternative for Leave to Designate Certain
Materials Attorneys Eyes Only [Doc. No. 22, filed 2/24/2017];
Plaintiff’s Notice of
Discovery Dispute, Regarding January 26, 2017 Order Compelling Disclosure [Doc. No. 23,
filed 2/24/2017]; and Defendants’ Motion for Level 1 Restriction of Exhibit B to Defendants’
Forthwith Motion to Modify the Protective Order or in the Alternative to Designate Certain

Materials Attorneys Eyes Only [Doc. No. 25, filed 2/27/2017].
For reasons stated on the record, it is:
ORDERED:

Plaintiff’s Request for a Hearing or Ruling on Plaintiff’s Pending Notice
of Discovery Dispute, Regarding January 26, 2017 Order Compelling
Disclosure [Doc. No. 12, filed 2/23/2017] is GRANTED to the extent
that it requests a hearing.

ORDERED:

Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 26(c)
[Doc. No. 13, filed 2/23/2017] is DENIED as moot.

ORDERED:

Defendants’ Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint
[Doc. No. 19, 2/24/2017] is DENIED as moot.

ORDERED:

Defendants’ Second and Final Motion for Extension of Time to
Respond to Complaint [Doc. No. 20, filed 2/24/2017] is DENIED as
moot.

ORDERED:

Plaintiff’s Motion Seeking Leave of Court to Amend the Amended
Complaint (“Motion to Amend”) [Doc. No. 21, filed 2/24/2017] shall
remain a pending motion. Defendant shall have fourteen days from
today’s date to file a response to this motion. Plaintiff shall then have
fourteen days from the filing of the response to file it’s Reply to the
motion.

ORDERED:

Defendants’ deadline for filing a responsive pleading to the operative
complaint is extended. If Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend is denied,
Defendants shall have 14 days to file a responsive pleading to the
Second Amended Verified Complaint. If Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend
is granted, Defendants shall file responsive pleadings consistent with
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

ORDERED:

Defendants’ Forthwith Motion to Modify the Protective Order or in the
Alternative for Leave to Designate Certain Materials Attorneys Eyes
Only [Doc. No. 22, filed 2/24/2017] shall remain a pending motion.
The Clerk of Court shall remove the restriction level of the
motion.
The Response [Doc. No. 11, filed 2/23/2017] shall be designated as
the Plaintiff’s Response to [Doc. No. 22].
Defendants shall have fourteen (14) days from today’s date to file a
Reply in support of [Doc. No. 22].

ORDERED:

Plaintiff’s Notice of Discovery Dispute, Regarding January 26, 2017
Order Compelling Disclosure [Doc. No. 23, filed 2/24/2017] is DENIED
without prejudice with leave for Plaintiff to re-file after the parties
confer either telephonically or in person.

ORDERED:

Defendants’ Motion for Level 1 Restriction of Exhibit B to Defendants’
Forthwith Motion to Modify the Protective Order or in the Alternative
to Designate Certain Materials Attorneys Eyes Only [Doc. No. 25, filed
2/27/2017] is GRANTED. [#26] shall remain under Level 1 Restriction.

ORDERED:

The Scheduling Conference set for March 28, 2017 is VACATED. A
Status Conference is set for April 7, 2017 at 10:30 a.m.

ORDERED:

The parties shall confer either in person or by phone before contacting
the Judge’s chambers to address any discovery disputes.

HEARING CONCLUDED.
Court in recess: 3:32 p.m.
Total time in court: 01:33
To order a transcript of this proceeding, contact Stevens-Koenig Reporting at (303)9888470.