IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

927 COLE STREET, GOLDEN, COLORADO, and

2008 TOYOTA HIGHLANDER VIN #JTEES42A182076495,

Defendants.

ORDER SETTING RULE 16(b) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

AND RULE 26(f) PLANNING MEETING

The above captioned case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer by District Judge 

Philip A. Brimmer, pursuant to the Order Referring Case (doc. #5) filed August 12, 2011. See 28 U.S.C. 

§636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and FED.R.CIV.P. 72(a) and (b).

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

(1) The court shall hold a FED.R.CIV.P. 16(b)scheduling and planning conference on

September 27, 2013, at

10:45 a.m. (Mountain Time)

The conference shall be held in Courtroom A-402, Fourth Floor, of the Alfred A. Arraj U.S. Courthouse, 

901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado. If this date is not convenient for any party1, he or she shall confer with 

opposing parties and contact the court to reschedule the conference to a more convenient time. Please 

remember that anyone seeking entry into the Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse will be 

required to show valid photo identification. See D.C.COLO.LCivR 83.2B.

 

1

The term “party” as used in this Order means counsel for any party represented by a lawyer, and any pro 

se party not represented by a lawyer.

Case 1:11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS Document 73 Filed 08/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3
2

A copy of instructions for the preparation of a scheduling order and a form scheduling order can be 

downloaded from the “Forms” section on the Court’s website under the “Standardized Order Forms” 

heading.

In accordance with D.C.COLO.ECF.PROC. 5.12, the parties shall file their proposed scheduling 

order and also email an editable version to Shaffer_Chambers@cod.uscourts.gov no later than:

Seven (7) days prior to the 

conference

(2) In preparation for the scheduling/planning conference, the parties are directed to confer in 

accordance with FED.R.CIV.P. 26(f), no later than: 

Twenty-one (21) days prior to the 

conference

The court strongly encourages the parties to meet face to face, but should that prove impossible, the parties 

may meet by telephone conference. All parties are jointly responsible for arranging and attending the Rule 

26(f) meeting.

During the Rule 26(f) meeting, the parties shall discuss the nature and basis of their claims and 

defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case, make or arrange for the 

disclosures required by FED.R.CIV.P. 26(a)(1), and develop their proposed scheduling/discovery plan. The 

parties should also discuss the possibility of informal discovery, such as conducting joint interviews with 

potential witnesses, joint meetings with clients, depositions via telephone, or exchanging documents 

outside of formal discovery.

In those cases in which: (i) the parties’ substantive allegations involve extensive computergenerated records; (ii) a substantial amount of disclosure or discovery will involve information or records 

in electronic form (i.e., e-mail, word processing, databases); (iii) expert witnesses will develop testimony 

based in large part on computer data and/or modeling; or (iv) any party plans to present a substantial 

amount of evidence in digital form at trial, the parties shall confer regarding steps they can take to preserve 

computer records and data, facilitate computer-based discovery and who will pay costs, resolve privilege 

issues, limit discovery costs and delay, and avoid discovery disputes relating to electronic discovery. The 

parties shall be prepared to discuss these issues, as appropriate, in the proposed Scheduling Order and at 

the scheduling and planning conference. 

These are the minimum requirements for the Rule 26(f) meeting. The parties are encouraged to 

have a comprehensive discussion and are required to approach the meeting cooperatively and in good faith. 

The parties are reminded that the purpose of the Rule 26(f) meeting is to expedite the disposition of the 

action, discourage wasteful pretrial activities, and improve the quality of any eventual trial through more 

thorough preparation. The discussion of claims and defenses shall be a substantive, meaningful discussion. 

Case 1:11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS Document 73 Filed 08/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3
3

The parties are reminded that pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 26(d), no discovery shall be sought prior to 

the Rule 26(f) meeting.

(3) The parties shall comply with the mandatory disclosure requirements of FED.R.CIV.P. 26(a)(1) 

no later than:

Seven (7) days prior to the 

conference

Counsel and parties are reminded that mandatory disclosure requirements encompass computer-based 

evidence which may be used to support claims or defenses. Mandatory disclosures must be supplemented 

by the parties consistent with the requirements of FED.R.CIV.P. 26(e). Mandatory disclosures and 

supplementation are not to be filed with the Clerk of the Court.

(4) All parties are expected to be familiar with the United States District Court for the District of 

Colorado Local Rules of Practice (D.C.COLOL.CIVR.). Copies are available through the District Court’s 

web site: www.cod.uscourts.gov. 

All out-of-state counsel shall comply with D.C.COLOL.CIVR. 83.3 prior to the 

Scheduling/Planning Conference. 

DATED at Denver, Colorado, on August 13, 2013.

BY THE COURT:

s/Craig B. Shaffer

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS Document 73 Filed 08/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3