HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-cv-2063-CNS-MEH - City Of Fort Collins V. Open International, Et Al. - 190 - OrderFrom:COD ENotice@cod.uscourts.gov
To:COD ENotice@cod.uscourts.gov
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Activity in Case 1:21-cv-02063-CNS-MEH City of Fort Collins v. Open International, LLC et al Order
on Motion for Leave to Restrict
Date:Wednesday, January 25, 2023 6:27:04 PM
This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT
RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended.
***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States
policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to
receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required
by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later
charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the
referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply.
U.S. District Court - District of Colorado
District of Colorado
Notice of Electronic Filing
The following transaction was entered on 1/25/2023 at 6:25 PM MST and filed on 1/25/2023
Case Name:City of Fort Collins v. Open International, LLC et al
Case Number:1:21-cv-02063-CNS-MEH
Filer:
Document Number:190(No document attached)
Docket Text:
ORDER granting [143] Motion for Leave to Restrict; granting [144] Motion for
Leave to Restrict ; granting [145] Motion for Leave to Restrict; granting [146]
Motion for Leave to Restrict; granting [147] Motion for Leave to Restrict;
granting [168] Motion for Leave to Restrict; granting [169] Motion for Leave to
Restrict; granting [170] Motion for Leave to Restrict; granting [171] Motion for
Leave to Restrict; granting [182] Motion for Leave to Restrict; granting [183]
Motion for Leave to Restrict. Plaintiff has filed motions to restrict at ECF 143,
144, 145, 146, 147, 168, 169, 170, 171, 182, and 183. Defendants filed a response
to ECF 143-147, and I assign their opposition to the remaining motions as well. I
agree generally with Defendants' premise that as this case draws closer to trial,
especially considering that Plaintiff is a municipality, the presumption against
restriction gets much stronger. Indeed, if this case proceeds to the pretrial
stage (i.e., close to trial) with no compromise resolution likely, I invite
Defendants to file a motion to unrestrict all documents, which I would likely
grant if referred to me. Also, as a general matter, I view documents generated
solely because of a lawsuit (e.g., expert/damages reports, deposition
testimony) and while the case is in intense discovery, to have less of a public
interest. Other documents that were created outside of the lawsuit may have
more of a public interest in disclosure, yet I still believe in protecting litigants'
self-expressed need of confidentiality when appropriate. As with prior orders in
this case (to which the parties' consented) restricting certain filings, I
provisionally grant the motions identified herein. However, I ask Plaintiff's
counsel to advise their client that at some point, if the case approaches trial, all
restrictions will be lifted. by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 1/25/2023.
Text Only Entry(mehlc3, )