Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/cod;;1:17-cv-02523_de143> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 6 of
6
with 100 items per page.
- cod;;1:17-cv-02523_de143 RegisterActionDate "2018-07-03" @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-02523_de143 RegisterActionDescriptionText "ORDER This matter is before the court on 140 Plaintiff's Motion for Hearing on Judicial Notice (the "Motion for Hearing"). Through the Motion for Hearing, Plaintiff requests that the Court "schedule a hearing and the presentment of the facts" presented in 137 Plaintiff's Motion for Judicial Notice. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201(e), "[o]n timely request, a party is entitled to be heard on the propriety of taking judicial notice and the nature of the fact to be noticed." The Tenth Circuit has held, however, that Rule 201(e) does not "require a court under all circumstances to hold a formalhearingevery time aproponent of judicial notice so demands" but rather the opportunity to be heard may be satisfied in an appropriate case "by duly considering [the proponent's]briefs." Am. Stores Co. v. C.I.R., 170 F.3d 1267, 1271 (10th Cir. 1999). The Court will consider 137 Plaintiff's Motion for Judicial Notice in connection with its consideration of Defendants' pending Motions to Dismiss. To the extent the Court believes that a hearing would assist in the resolution of the Motion for Judicial Notice, the Court will set a hearing at that time. Accordingly, the Motion for Hearing is DENIED. SO ORDERED, by Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak on 7/03/2018. Text Only Entry (stvlc1, ) (Entered: 07/03/2018)" @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-02523_de143 AdministrativeID "144" @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-02523_de143 OntologyLabel order @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-02523_de143 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:17-cv-02523_de136 @default.
- cod;;1:17-cv-02523_de143 hasReferenceToOtherEntry cod;;1:17-cv-02523_de139 @default.