Opinion
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00077-RBJ-KLM
06-13-2012
MINUTE ORDER
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Attorney's Fees [Docket No. 19; Filed June 6, 2012] and Plaintiff's Motion for Leave of the Court to Append to Response [Docket No. 22; Filed June 11, 2012] (the "Motions").
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Neither Motion complies with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A., which provides as follows: "The court will not consider any motion, other than a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 or 56, unless counsel for the moving party or a pro se party, before filing the motion, has conferred or made reasonable, good-faith efforts to confer with opposing counsel or a pro se party to resolve the disputed matter." Simply copying another motion's statement of conferral as Defendants did in their motion, and simply sending one conferral email with a response demanded three hours later as Plaintiff did in his motion, do not constitute reasonable, good-faith efforts to confer. The parties are cautioned that Rule 7.1A. requires "meaningful negotiations." Hoelzel v. First Select Corp., 214 F.R.D. 634, 635 (D. Colo. 2003).