IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya

Civil Action No. 11–cv–02497–MSK–KMT

SARA MOBLEY,

Plaintiff,

v. 

LEGAL HELPERS DEBT RESOLUTION, LLC,

MACEY, ALEMAN, HYSLIP & SEARNS, and

JEFFREY HYSLIP, 

Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the court on “the Parties’ Stipulated Motion to Modify Scheduling

Order” [Doc. No. 48] filed September 26, 2012.

This case was originally removed to this court over a year ago, on September 23, 2011. 

[Doc. No. 1.] On December 13, 2011, a Scheduling Order was entered setting discovery and

dispositive motions deadlines in June and July, 2012. The court extended those dates to October

1, 2012, for the conclusion of discovery and November 1, 2012, as the deadline to file

dispositive motions based on the parties’ representations concerning private mediation.

The parties now seek an additional two month extension based on the fact that they

engaged in partially successful mediation and apparently gave themselves a stay of discovery

during that period even in light of the specific refusal of the court to grant a stay. [Doc. No. 43.] 

Case 1:11-cv-02497-MSK-KMT Document 53 Filed 09/27/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3
2

Judge Krieger’s Practice Standards provide

II.G. Motions for Extension of Time

Motions for extensions of time are governed by FED. R. CIV. P. 6;

D.C.COLO.LCivR 6.1 and 7.1A; and D.C.Colo.ECF Proc. V.L.2. Motions will be

denied if they do not comply with these rules. To be granted, such motions

require a showing of good cause. Unless the circumstances are unanticipatable

and unavoidable, the following do not constitute good cause: inconvenience to

counsel or parties, press of other business, scheduling conflicts (especially when

more than one attorney has entered an appearance for a party), or agreements by

counsel. Please be aware that requested extensions of time, even if stipulated, may

be denied if the extension adversely affects the scheduling of the case or other

cases. In addition, if extensions are granted, they may prevent the determination

of the matter prior to a scheduled hearing or trial.

MSK Civ. Practice Standard, II.G.

Further, Judge Krieger issued specific Orders in this case stating, 

[r]equests for modification of deadlines set by the Scheduling Order will be

referred to the Magistrate Judge for resolution. However, any request to extend

the dispositive motion deadline more than 30 days beyond the deadline originally

set in the initial Scheduling Order must show exceptional circumstances

warranting the extension.

District Judge Marcia S. Krieger Trial Preparation Order - Civil [Doc. No. 20] at 2.

Such a showing has not been made in this case. The parties were specifically advised on

July 24, 2012, that the case was not stayed because the parties had not made a proper showing

under String Cheese Incident, LLC v. Stylus Shows, Inc. , 02–CV–01934–LTB–PAC, 2006 WL

894955, at *2 (D. Colo. March 30, 2006). At this point, they also have not shown exceptional

circumstances warranting the extension of the dispositive motions deadline, which has already

been extended once previously for the purpose of allowing the parties to engage in settlement

negotiations. [Doc. No. 43.]

Case 1:11-cv-02497-MSK-KMT Document 53 Filed 09/27/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3
3

Therefore, “the Parties’ Stipulated Motion to Modify Scheduling Order” [Doc. No. 48] is

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The discovery cut off date is extended to November 1,

2012. The dispositive motions deadline will remain as previously scheduled, November 1, 2012.

Dated this 27th day of September, 2012.

Case 1:11-cv-02497-MSK-KMT Document 53 Filed 09/27/12 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3