BERRY v. COLVIN, 14-cv-01171-REB. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Colorado
Number: infdco20150526c51
Visitors: 8
Filed: May 22, 2015
Latest Update: May 22, 2015
Summary: ORDER ROBERT E. BLACKBURN , District Judge . This matter is before me sua sponte. It has come to the court's attention that the parties previously indicated their intention to consent to the resolution of this case by a United States Magistrate Judge. ( See Joint Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases 10 at 3 [#12], 1 filed November 7, 2014.) Despite this ostensible agreement, the parties have not yet filed the form of consent required by D.C.COLO.LCivR 72.2(d) to permit
Summary: ORDER ROBERT E. BLACKBURN , District Judge . This matter is before me sua sponte. It has come to the court's attention that the parties previously indicated their intention to consent to the resolution of this case by a United States Magistrate Judge. ( See Joint Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases 10 at 3 [#12], 1 filed November 7, 2014.) Despite this ostensible agreement, the parties have not yet filed the form of consent required by D.C.COLO.LCivR 72.2(d) to permit ..
More
ORDER
ROBERT E. BLACKBURN, District Judge.
This matter is before me sua sponte. It has come to the court's attention that the parties previously indicated their intention to consent to the resolution of this case by a United States Magistrate Judge. (See Joint Case Management Plan for Social Security Cases ¶ 10 at 3 [#12],1 filed November 7, 2014.) Despite this ostensible agreement, the parties have not yet filed the form of consent required by D.C.COLO.LCivR 72.2(d) to permit the exercise of consent jurisdiction by a magistrate judge.
The court thus finds that a telephonic status conference is necessary to clarify this issue.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the court shall conduct a telephonic (non-appearance) status conference on Wednesday, May 27, 2015, at 11:00 a.m. (MDT), at which time counsel for both parties shall contact the court's Judicial Assistant at (303) 335-2350 to discuss the parties' ostensible consent to reassigning this matter to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge, as indicated by their previous submission to the court; and
2. That counsel for plaintiff shall arrange, initiate, and coordinate the conference call necessary to facilitate the status conference.
FootNotes
1. "[#12]" is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court's management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order.
Source: Leagle
