Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 9 of
9
with 100 items per page.
- cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32 RegisterActionDate "2016-09-26" @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32 RegisterActionDescriptionText "ORDER: Before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification 15 , filed on September 9, 2016. Since that date, Plaintiffs have filed three collections of additional or "supplemental" exhibits in support of their motion ( 16 , 28 , and 30 ). In the interest of justice, the Court will accept these additional exhibits as filed. However, Plaintiffs are warned that exhibits are due on the same day as the filing that they support. In the future, the Court will summarily strike any exhibit filed late and without leave (or stipulation from the opposing party). Also before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion for Order Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d) 31 . The Court will refer this motion to the Magistrate Judge. However, Plaintiffs' counsel is warned that his D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(a) conferral was both inappropriate and inadequate. Absent exigent circumstances or an understanding between the parties, an attempt to confer during nonbusiness hours, such as the attempt here to confer on a Saturday, is inappropriate. Moreover, Plaintiffs' counsel could in no sense conclude that he had adequately conferred when he received no response to that Saturday e-mail, thus somehow permitting him to go forward with filing the motion on the same day. Plaintiffs' counsel is also incorrect in his assertion that "parties can submit [motions for Rule 502(d)] orders regardless of whether they are opposed or unopposed." The only exceptions to the duty to confer are listed in D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(b) (and even some of those exceptions do not apply in front of the undersigned, see WJM Revised Practice Standard III.D.1). Rule 502(d) motions are not listed there. Failure to adequately and meaningfully confer often creates unnecessary work for the parties and the Court. Plaintiffs' counsel is on notice that his motions will be summarily stricken for future failure to comply in good faith with pre-filing conferral obligations. SO ORDERED by Judge William J. Martinez on 09/26/2016. Text Only Entry (wjmlc1) (Entered: 09/26/2016)" @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32 AdministrativeID "33" @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32 OntologyLabel order @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de14 @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de15 @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de27 @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de29 @default.
- cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de32 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:16-cv-02155_de31 @default.