Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00135-PAB-KLM
09-02-2011
MINUTE ORDER
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Modify Amended Scheduling Order [Docket No. 40; Filed September 1, 2011] (the "Motion").
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Plaintiff's failure to comply fully with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A. Plaintiff provides insufficient information regarding its efforts to comply. See Hoelzel v. First Select Corp., 214 F.R.D. 634, 635-36 (D. Colo. 2003) (Rule 7.1A requires "meaningful negotiations" by the parties; "[t]he rule is not satisfied by one party sending a single e-mail [, letter, or voice message] to another party").
The Motion is further subject to denial for Plaintiff's failure to comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 6.1D, which prescribes that any motion for extension of time shall "state a date certain for the requested extension of time."