HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-cv-2063-CNS-MEH - City Of Fort Collins V. Open International, Et Al. - 048 - Order To Show CauseIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 21-cv-02063-DDD-NYW
CITY OF FORT COLLINS,
Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant,
v.
OPEN INTERNATIONAL, LLC
Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff,
and
OPEN INVESTMENTS, LLC,
Defendant.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff City of Fort Collins’s Motion to Quash
Defendants’ Subpoena on Vanir Construction Management, Inc. and for Protective Order (the
“Motion” or “Motion to Quash”) [Doc. 45, filed on May 27, 2022]. The Motion was referred to
the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the Order Referring Case dated September 15,
2021, [Doc. 20], and the Order dated June 2, 2022. [Doc. 47].
The Motion to Quash was filed under Level 2 Restriction, which “limits access to the
filing party and the court,” D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.2(b), and thus prevents the opposing party from
viewing the document. W. Convenience Stores, Inc. v. Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc., 970 F. Supp.
Case 1:21-cv-02063-DDD-NYW Document 48 Filed 06/02/22 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2
2d 1162, 1189 n.10 (D. Colo. 2013).0
1 Upon the court’s preliminary review of the Motion, it is
not plainly apparent why Defendants have been restricted from viewing this document; indeed,
the Motion demonstrates that Plaintiff conferred with Defendants about the relief sought in the
Motion and that Defendants oppose the requested relief. See [Doc. 45 at 1]. Given the
importance of hearing Defendants’ arguments in opposition to the Motion to Quash, Plaintiff is
hereby ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE, in writing and on or before June 6, 2022, why this
court should not reduce the restriction level associated with the Motion to Level 1 Restriction.2
DATED: June 2, 2022 BY THE COURT:
_______________________
Nina Y. Wang
United States Magistrate Judge
1 The Motion’s Certificate of Service states that the Motion was “electronically served [on
Defendants] via CM/ECF system.” [Doc. 45 at 13]. Thus, there is no present indication that
Defendants are able to access the Motion or otherwise have been served with the Motion.
2 The court acknowledges that the Local Rules provide that documents subject to a motion to
restrict may be filed under restriction “until the motion is determined by the court,” which must
be filed within 14 days of the filing of the restricted document. D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.2(e). The
court does not find it in the interests of justice to wait 14 days to ascertain why Plaintiff filed the
Motion to Quash at Level 2 Restriction, given Defendants’ deadline to respond to the Motion to
Quash. Plaintiff is ADVISED that responding to this Order to Show Cause does not obviate
Plaintiff’s obligation to file a motion to restrict the Motion to Quash should Plaintiff seek to
maintain restriction of that document.
Case 1:21-cv-02063-DDD-NYW Document 48 Filed 06/02/22 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2