Anyone know what a Special Master is? I've heard of a Special Purpose but not a Special Master. LOL

MINUTE ORDER

Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe

It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Status Conference and Schedule for Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) Conference (docket no. 189) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The portion of the motion requesting that a Status Conference be set is DENIED, noting that a Status Conference is already set before Magistrate Judge Watanabe. See below. The portion of the motion requesting that a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference be set is GRANTED.

This court has already set a Status Conference and Show Cause Hearing concerning lack of service of certain defendants for April 1, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. Moreover, Judge Krieger conducted a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference with the parties on January 7, 2010, but Judge Krieger did not enter a Rule 16 Scheduling Order at this hearing. Instead, Judge Krieger told the parties “I will be referring the case for pretrial administration to Magistrate Judge Watanabe;...” See transcript of the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference held before Judge Krieger on January 7, 2010, exhibit A attached to this motion at page 21, lines 14 -16, inclusive. See also page 26, lines 2-9, inclusive.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that a Rule 16 Scheduling Conference is set on April 1, 2010, at 9:00 a.m., in Courtroom A-502, Fifth Floor, Alfred A. Arraj U.S. Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado. The parties shall meet, confer and prepare a proposed Scheduling Order and submit the same to this court on or before March 26, 2010. In preparing the proposed Rule 16 Scheduling Order the parties shall keep in mind the comments made and direction given by Judge Krieger at the January 7, 2010 hearing. In particular, Judge Krieger’s comments as outlined in the transcript of the Rule 16 Scheduling Conference on January 7, 2010, Exhibit A attached to this motion at pages 22, 23, and 24.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall meet, confer, and discuss any protective order that may be necessary in this case and file a Stipulated Motion for Protective Order. If, however, the parties cannot agree upon a Protective Order, then a party believing that a Protective Order is necessary shall file such Motion for Protective Order consistent with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1 A on or before March 26, 2010.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall meet, confer, and discuss whether a Special Master pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 53 should be appointed in this case. After such discussion, if the parties collectively or if an individual party believes that a Special Master should be appointed, then either a Stipulated Motion for a Special Master or a Motion for a Special Master shall be filed consistent with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1 A on or before March 26, 2010.

Date: February 24, 2010