Opinion
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00682-WJM-MEH
02-11-2013
DIGITAL ADVERTISING DISPLAYS, INC., a Colorado corporation, Plaintiff, v. SHERWOOD PARTNERS, LLC, a California limited liability company, TIM COX, an individual, NEWFORTH PARTNERS, LLC, a California limited liability company, DHANDO INVESTMENTS, INC., a Delaware corporation, and ROBERT HOFFER, an individual, Defendants.
MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty , United States Magistrate Judge, on February 11, 2013.
Plaintiff's Amended Motion to Amend/Modify Scheduling Order [filed February 5, 2013; docket #54] is denied without prejudice for failure to comply with D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.1A and this Court's February 4, 2013 minute order. The certificate of conferral contained in the present motion is identical to the one included in the original February 1, 2013 motion; therefore, there is no indication that Plaintiff conferred with Defendants regarding the present amended motion. Furthermore, in its February 4, 2013 order, this Court directed that, "to the extent the Plaintiff chooses to re-file the motion and it is unopposed by some or all Defendants, the Court encourages the parties to work together to propose new deadlines for discovery as set forth in the governing Scheduling Order." There is no indication nor mention of this directive in the amended motion; thus, the Court cannot determine whether the parties agree or disagree with Plaintiff's request for an extension of 120 days for all deadlines in the Scheduling Order. Finally, Plaintiff's certificate of conferral indicates that there may be opposition to a request for extension depending upon whether Plaintiff were to file an Amended Complaint by the deadline of February 6, 2013. Plaintiff, in fact, filed an Amended Complaint on February 6, 2013. However, the Court cannot determine whether opposition will come solely from the "Hofer Defendants," or whether the "Sherwood Defendants" also oppose the amended motion due to the filing of the Amended Complaint.