From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Aurora Bank FSB v. First Guar. Mortg. Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
May 2, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00247-MSK-MEH (D. Colo. May. 2, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-00247-MSK-MEH

05-02-2012

AURORA BANK FSB, a Federal Savings Bank, Plaintiff, v. FIRST GUARANTY MORTGAGE CORP., a Virginia corporation, Defendant.


MINUTE ORDER

Entered by Michael E. Hegarty , United States Magistrate Judge, on May 2, 2012.

The Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Protective Order [filed April 27, 2012; docket #18] is denied without prejudice and the proposed Protective Order is refused for two reasons. First, paragraph 19 of the proposed Protective Order fails to properly and clearly describe the procedure for challenging confidentiality, as set forth in Gillard v. Boulder Valley Sch. Dist., 196 F.R.D. 382 (D. Colo. 2000). The Court has already advised the parties that it will not enter a protective order in this case unless the protective order complies with Gillard. (Docket #15.) Second, paragraph 22 of the proposed Protective Order is improper insofar as the Court will not retain jurisdiction over a protective order after the case is closed. The parties are granted leave to submit a revised proposed protective order in accordance with Gillard and this minute order.


Summaries of

Aurora Bank FSB v. First Guar. Mortg. Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
May 2, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00247-MSK-MEH (D. Colo. May. 2, 2012)
Case details for

Aurora Bank FSB v. First Guar. Mortg. Corp.

Case Details

Full title:AURORA BANK FSB, a Federal Savings Bank, Plaintiff, v. FIRST GUARANTY…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: May 2, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 12-cv-00247-MSK-MEH (D. Colo. May. 2, 2012)