The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig B. Shaffer United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER MODIFYING RULE 5 SERVICE REQUIREMENTS
Pursuant to Rule 66 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court establishes the following rules regarding service of papers filed with the Court in this action:
1. Except as provided in the following paragraphs, claimants or other interested persons (including the Receiver) who file any motion, response, brief, memorandum, affidavit, or any other paper may limit service under Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to persons served automatically by the Court's CM/ECF system. The Receiver may, at its discretion, mail papers to the forty (40) largest claimants as previously ordered by this Court, in situations that the Receiver believes such mailing is appropriate. The remaining paragraphs of this order are not intended to require service by mail on persons served automatically by the CM/ECF system, except that claimants who mail or otherwise deliver papers to the Clerk of the Court for filing shall make service by mailing or otherwise delivering hard copies to the Receiver, Receiver's counsel, and counsel for the United States at the addresses indicated at the end of this order, in addition to any other person required to be served under the remainder of this order.
2. Any motion, memorandum brief, supporting affidavit, or other paper filed with the Court shall be served on all persons against whom any relief is sought, whether such relief is sought in the document being filed or has been sought in any prior document in further support of which the document is being filed. In addition, any person known to have a direct pecuniary interest in the outcome of any motion or known to have a claim to or lien upon the property that is the subject of any motion shall also be served. This shall not be construed to waive any right of any person who has not filed a claim or otherwise been a party in this action to object to the adequacy of any process used to add them as a party in this action.
3. Any objection, response, opposition, memorandum, brief, supporting affidavit or other paper filed with the Court shall be served on all persons who have sought the relief which is being opposed, as well as on any other person known to have already filed a response or other paper.
4. All papers filed with the Court in this action that are filed electronically need not identify or list those served automatically by the CM/ECF system, but shall clearly state, in the certificate of service, that the paper is being electronically filed and thus served on those served automatically by the Court's CM/ECF, system and shall thereafter list all persons (and addresses) to whom additional service is being mailed. All papers that are not electronically filed shall continue to list all persons served (which may be limited as provided in paragraph 1 above).
5. The Court may, on review of any paper filed in this action, direct the party or attorney filing the paper to serve it on all claimants (at their last known addressed as known to the Receiver), or on specified parties, in which event the person so directed shall promptly file a supplemental certificate of service indicating when and how the additional parties were served.
6. The Court may limit mailing of any notice or order issued by the Court, which is not considered to be of general interest to all claimants, to those understood to have an interest; provided, however, that the Receiver shall, and any claimant or other interested person may, advise the Court promptly if it believes that an order that has not been sent to all claimants by mail should be sent to all claimants, or to certain additional claimants. Persons interested in tracking orders in this case are also advised that the Receiver maintains a website on which it posts the Court's orders entered in this case: www.sterlingcorp.com. (This Order does not require that the website be promptly updated.)
7. The Receiver shall make a copy of the mailing list for the entire Receivership Estate available upon request of any party or claimant in this receivership action.
Dated in Denver, Colorado, this 8th day of February, 2006.
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw ...