Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Carl Hubbard v. Midland Credit Management

March 23, 2011

CARL HUBBARD, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., A KANSAS CORPORATION, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya

ORDER SETTING RULE 16(b) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE AND RULE 26(f) PLANNING MEETING

This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya by Chief District Judge Wiley Y. Daniel, pursuant to the Order of Reference filed March 22, 2011. See 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b).

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

(1) The court shall hold aFed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)scheduling and planning conference on June 6, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. (Mountain Time).

The conference shall be held in Courtroom C-201, Second Floor, of the Byron Rogers U.S. Courthouse, 1929 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado. If this date is not convenient for any party*fn1, he or she shall file a motion to reschedule the conference to a more convenient time. Please remember that anyone seeking entry into the Byron Rogers United States Courthouse will be required to show valid photo identification. See D.C.COLO.LCivR 83.2B.

A copy of instructions for the preparation of a scheduling order and a form scheduling order can be downloaded from the Court's website at www.co.uscourts.gov/forms-frame.htm (Click on "Civil Forms" in the blue box at the top of the screen and scroll down to the bold heading "Standardized Order Forms"). Parties shall prepare the proposed scheduling order in accordance with the Court's form.

The parties shall submit their proposed scheduling order, pursuant to District of Colorado Electronic Case Filing ("ECF") Procedures V.L., on or before:

5:00 p.m. (Mountain Time) on May 31, 2011.

Attorneys and/or pro se parties not participating in ECF shall submit their proposed scheduling order on paper to the Clerk's Office. However, if any party in the case is participating in ECF, it is the responsibility of that party to submit the proposed scheduling order pursuant to the District of Colorado ECF Procedures.

The plaintiff shall notify all parties who have not yet entered an appearance of the date and time of the scheduling/planning conference, and shall provide a copy of this Order to those parties.

(2) In preparation for the scheduling/planning conference, the parties are directed to confer in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), on or before:

May 16, 2011.

The court strongly encourages the parties to meet face to face, but should that prove impossible, the parties may meet by telephone conference. All parties are jointly responsible for arranging and attending the Rule 26(f) meeting.

During the Rule 26(f) meeting, the parties shall discuss the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case, make or arrange for the disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1), and develop their proposed scheduling/discovery plan. The parties should also discuss the possibility of informal discovery, such as conducting joint interviews with potential ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.