Home Instead, Inc. v. Florance et al

Filing 79

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The motion to stay pending appeal filed on behalf of David Florance, Michelle Florance, and Friend of a Friend, Inc., (Filing No. 71 ), is denied as moot. The motion to restrict filed on behalf of Plaintiff Home Instead, Inc ., (Filing No. 73 ), is granted and filing no. 76 (Exhibit H to the affidavit of Adam Barney) shall remain filed as a restricted access document. The parties shall review the court's prior progression order, (Filing No. 64 ), and shall jo intly confer to determine if any of the deadlines set forth in that order need to be extended or changed. a. If any amendments to the progression order are needed: i. On or before July 31, 2013, the parties shall file a joint motion to amend the final progression order for the courts consideration, or ii. If one or more of the parties believes a planning conference is needed to discuss any modification of the progression order, or if the parties cannot agree on one or more of the deadlines , on or before July 24, 2013, a party shall contact my chambers at [phone], or by email addressed to [e-mail], to arrange a conference call. Absent either a motion or a planning conference to modify the progression order entered on April 23, 2013, the court's prior progression order, (Filing No. 64), will remain in effect. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (AOA)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
HOME INSTEAD, INC., a Nebraska Corp.;
Plaintiff,

8:12CV264

vs.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
DAVID FLORANCE, MICHELLE
FLORANCE, FRIEND OF A FRIEND, INC.,
Defendants.
Upon remand from the Eighth Circuit court of Appeals,
IT IS ORDERED:
1)

The motion to stay pending appeal filed on behalf of David Florance, Michelle
Florance, and Friend of a Friend, Inc., (Filing No. 71), is denied as moot.

2)

The motion to restrict filed on behalf of Plaintiff Home Instead, Inc., (Filing No.
73), is granted and filing no. 76 (Exhibit H to the affidavit of Adam Barney) shall
remain filed as a restricted access document.

3)

The parties shall review the court’s prior progression order, (Filing No. 64), and
shall jointly confer to determine if any of the deadlines set forth in that order need
to be extended or changed.
a.

If any amendments to the progression order are needed:
i. On or before July 31, 2013, the parties shall file a joint motion to
amend the final progression order for the court’s consideration, or
ii. If one or more of the parties believes a planning conference is needed
to discuss any modification of the progression order, or if the parties
cannot agree on one or more of the deadlines, on or before July 24,
2013, a party shall contact my chambers at [phone], or by
email addressed to [e-mail], to arrange a conference
call.

b.

July 17, 2013.

Absent either a motion or a planning conference to modify the progression
order entered on April 23, 2013, the court’ prior progression order, (Filing
No. 64), will remain in effect.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Cheryl R. Zwart
United States Magistrate Judge