REV103530 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PQabodu December 14, 2005 BTU EMPIRE CORPORATION 701 Market Street Suite 733 St. LOUIa, Missouri 83101-1826 314.342.3400 Ms. Janet Binns Environmental Protection Specialist Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology 1313 Sherman Street -Room 215 Denver, Colorado 80203 (303)866-4944 Re: BTU Empire Corporation (Empire) -Eagle Mines (Permit No. C-81-044), Status Report on Pending Litigation in BTU Empire Corp. v. Ray and Brad Barker Dear Ms. Binns: In our August 2005 status report re: the pending litigation in BTU Empire Corp. v. Ray and Brad Barker, we noted that the Court had adopted the Federal Magistrate's recommendation that the case be remanded back to District Court in Craig, Colorado. With adoption of the motion to remand the case to District Court, the previously established schedule is voided and a new schedule has recently been established through a scheduling conference by the District Court. Our legal counsel has proceeded with contacts with the District Court in the pending case. A Status Conference (conference call) was held on October 21st with Judge Michael O'Hara that included preliminary discussions of scheduling, settlement, and depositions. During the Status Conference, Judge O'Hara indicated that his preference is to establish a trial date, as a first step. In a ruling in November, the presiding Judge isued a ruling allowing Glen Stepson (Barker's hunting leasce) to intervene in the case. The judge also indicated that he requires the parties to pursue Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) prior to trial, offered the court's resources to facilitate ADR, and directed counsel to coordinate with each other on some form of ADR. A subsequent Scheduling Conference was held on November 8th, during which Judge O'Hara set a trial date of April 17-19, 2006. Both BTU Empire and the Barkers are proceeding with collection of background information and scheduling of depositions in preparation for future court hearings. Depositions, originally scheduled for the week of December 12th, have been rescheduled for the week of January 9th 2006, as a result of ongoing discussions between the parties counsels. A tentative date of January 13th 2006 has been set to initiate alternative dispute resolution efforts. 1) The Court has not formally responded to or acted on the April 4, 2005, recommendations of the Federal Magistrate relative to the November 24, 2004, and subsequent supplemental filings. Those recommendations (copy provided with the April Status Report) address the pending motion to Amend the Complaint to include Lisa Barker and the Colorado DNR -Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, as additional parties with affected interests. 2) The Court has not responded to the following legal filings (copies provided with the May Status Report): Objections to Recommendations of U.S. Magistrate and Request for De Novo Determination by the Court (4/15/05) Supplemental Filing in Support of Objections to Recommendations of U.S. Magistrate (4/15/05) Defendant's Notice of Change of Fact (4/18/05)