Free Order on Motion to Clarify - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:03-cv-02514-EWN-BNB

Document 95

Filed 11/29/2006

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland Civil Action No. 03-cv-02514-EWN-BNB KERRY L. COURNOYER, Plaintiff, v. LARRY E. REID, DAVID D. HOLT, and Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ ORDER ______________________________________________________________________________ This matter is before me on the plaintiff' Motion for Clarification [Doc. # 80-1, filed s 5/16/06]. The Motion for Clarification is DENIED AS MOOT. The plaintiff is incarcerated by the Colorado Department of Corrections. He previously sought to modify the Scheduling Order to extend his expert witness disclosure deadline. Motion for Extension of Time . . . . [Doc. #57, filed 1/23/06]. He also sought an order directing the defendants to provide and pay for transportation to visit a potential expert witness. Id. On May 1, 2006, I denied the plaintiff' request to modify the Scheduling Order because the plaintiff s did not establish that he had exercised reasonable diligence in an effort to obtain his expert witness. Order entered May 1, 2006 [Doc. # 78]. Consequently, I also denied as moot the plaintiff' request for an order directing the defendants to transport him to see a potential expert s witness. Id.

Case 1:03-cv-02514-EWN-BNB

Document 95

Filed 11/29/2006

Page 2 of 2

The plaintiff now seeks clarification of my Order of May 1, 2006. The plaintiff asserts for the first time that the expert he seeks to disclose, Dr. Weinerman, had been disclosed to the defendants prior to the discovery deadline. Motion for Clarification, p. 3. The plaintiff further asserts that he is attempting to " secure Dr. Weinerman' testimony for trial." Motion for s Clarification, p. 4. See also Motion for Transportation to Dr. Weinerman, p. 3 [Doc. #60, filed 2/3/06]. By separate Recommendation, I have recommended that summary judgment enter in favor of the defendants on the plaintiff' remaining claim. Accordingly, s IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Clarify is DENIED AS MOOT. Dated November 28, 2006. BY THE COURT: s/ Boyd N. Boland United States Magistrate Judge

2