Fisher v. General Motors, LLC
| Gary Fisher |
| General Motors, LLC |
| 1:2026cv01409 |
| April 2, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado |
| S Kato Crews |
| N Reid Neureiter |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 29, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT identifying Corporate Parent GENERAL MOTORS LLC for General Motors, LLC. (Olsky, David) |
| Filing 9 ANSWER to #1 Complaint by General Motors, LLC.(Olsky, David) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by David Fox Olsky on behalf of General Motors, LLCAttorney David Fox Olsky added to party General Motors, LLC(pty:dft) (Olsky, David) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Gary Fisher. General Motors, LLC served on 4/8/2026, answer due 4/29/2026. (Duck, Kevin) |
Filing 6
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING/PLANNING CONFERENCE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall promptly serve Defendant.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Scheduling/Planning Conference pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) shall be held on:July 10, 2026 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom A-401, Fourth Floor, Alfred A. Arraj United States Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver, Colorado 80294The Scheduling Conference will be conducted via telephone. Five minutes prior to the start of the hearing, the parties are directed to call the conference line as a participant at (571) 353-2301, Access Code 841686937#.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall notify Defendant of the date and time of the Scheduling/Planning Conference. PLEASE READ ATTACHED ORDER. By Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter on 04/07/2026. (jrobe, )
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE ENCOURAGING CONSIDERATION OF CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION: This district's magistrate judges play a crucial role in the work and structure of the district court and the administration of justice. Under Local Rule 72.2, the parties have the option to consent to their case being presided over by a magistrate judge instead of a district judge. This court encourages parties to meaningfully confer and consider consenting to magistrate judge jurisdiction. There are many benefits to consenting. One such benefit is having a single judicial officer preside over every aspect of your case rather than two. A second benefit is the certainty of not having your trial date vacated when set before a magistrate judge. District judges preside over felony criminal cases and those cases receive priority over civil cases because of a criminal defendant's speedy trial rights. Magistrate judges do not preside over felony criminal cases, and therefore, they do not have to vacate civil trials because of criminal cases. If the parties do not choose to consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction, they should keep in mind Local Rule 72.3. Under this rule, the parties may consent to the final determination of a dispositive motion (motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss) by the assigned magistrate judge by filing a notice of consent for that motion. Please refer to Local Rule 72.3 for more information on that option. Consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction is voluntary, and no adverse consequence will result if one or more parties decline to consent. By Judge S. Kato Crews on 4/6/2026. Text Only Entry (skcja, ) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter for non-dispositive matters. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), this case is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to (1) convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a scheduling order meeting the requirements of D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.2, (2) conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause, and (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other non-dispositive motions. Court-sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. On the request of the parties by motion, this Court may direct the parties to engage in an early neutral evaluation, a settlement conference, or another alternative dispute resolution proceeding. Alternatively, the Magistrate Judge, at their discretion, may convene such early neutral evaluation and/or settlement conferences and direct related procedures as may facilitate resolution of this case without the necessity of a motion or prior authorization of the undersigned. Counsel for the Parties and all counsel who may later enter an appearance shall review and familiarize themselves with the undersigned's Standing Order and Practice Standards, as well as the Practice Standards of the assigned Magistrate Judge. By Judge S. Kato Crews on 4/6/2026. Text Only Entry (skcja, )
|
| Filing 3 SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Judge Consent Form) (agarc, ) |
| Filing 2 Case assigned to Judge S. Kato Crews and drawn to Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter. Text Only Entry. (agarc, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against General Motors, LLC (Filing fee $ 405,Receipt Number ACODC-10923482)Attorney Kevin R. Duck added to party Gary Fisher(pty:pla), filed by Gary Fisher. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons)(Duck, Kevin) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Fisher v. General Motors, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Gary Fisher | |
| Represented By: | Kevin R. Duck |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: General Motors, LLC | |
| Represented By: | David Fox Olsky |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
