Case 1:11-cv-00408-ABJ Document 91

Filed 03/09/12 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _______________________________________ ) UNITED WESTERN BANK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER ) OF THE CURRENCY, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________________)

1:11-cv-00408 The Honorable Amy Berman Jackson

PLAINTIFFS PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER Pursuant to the Courts Order on February 9, 2012, see ECF No. 74, Plaintiff United Western Bank hereby submits the attached proposed scheduling orders. Counsel for the parties have met and conferred, but are unable to agree on a proposed schedule. Plaintiff proposes a staggered, rather than simultaneous, briefing schedule. Such an approach would permit quick identification of the relevant issues while reducing the number of briefs the Court would be compelled to review from six to four. Furthermore, this approach mirrors the approach taken at the appellate level in instances of cross-appeals and comports with the preferred approach of some federal district courts. See Fed. R. App. P. 28.1; see also, e.g., Local Rules of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland 105.2(c). Should the Court determine that simultaneous briefing is preferable, Plaintiff has also provided an alternate proposed scheduling. Plaintiffs schedule anticipates an end to the briefing schedule almost one month ahead of Defendants proposed schedule. This expedient approach is appropriate in light of the time-sensitive nature of this action. See ECF No. 19 at 3-5.

Case 1:11-cv-00408-ABJ Document 91

Filed 03/09/12 Page 2 of 7

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Andrew L. Sandler . Andrew L. Sandler (DC Bar No. 387825) Samuel J. Buffone (DC Bar No. 161828) Liana R. Prieto (DC Bar No. 987287) BUCKLEYSANDLER LLP 1250 24th St., NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20037 (202) 349-8001 (Telephone) (202) 349-8080 (Facsimile) Attorneys for Plaintiff United Western Bank

/s/ Kirby D. Behre . Kirby D. Behre (DC Bar No. 398461) Lawrence D. Kaplan (DC Bar No. 415186) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 875 15th Street NW Washington, DC 20005 (202) 551-1719 (Telephone) (202) 551-0119 (Facsimile) Attorneys for Plaintiff United Western Bank

/s/ Theodore J. Abariotes . Theodore J. Abariotes Deputy General Counsel United Western Bancorp, Inc. 700 17th Street, Suite 2100 Denver, Colorado 80202 (720) 932-4216 (Telephone) (720) 946-1218 (Facsimile) Attorneys for Plaintiff United Western Bank Dated: March 9, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-00408-ABJ Document 91

Filed 03/09/12 Page 3 of 7

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 9th day of March, 2012, a true copy of the foregoing was filed electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent by email to all parties by operation of the Courts electronic filing system. Parties may also access this filing through the Courts electronic filing system.

. /s/ Liana Prieto Liana R. Prieto

Case 1:11-cv-00408-ABJ Document 91

Filed 03/09/12 Page 4 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _______________________________________ ) UNITED WESTERN BANK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) OFFICE OF THRIFT SUPERVISION, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________________)

Civil Action No. 11-0408 (ABJ)

[PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER Upon consideration of the parties proposed scheduling orders, it is ORDERED that: 1. 2. Defendants motion for summary judgment will be due by April 6, 2012. Plaintiffs opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment will be due by April 27, 2012. Defendants opposition to the cross-motion and reply will be due by May 18, 2012. Plaintiffs reply will be due by May 25, 2012.

3.

4.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that counsel read and comply with all of the Local Rules of this Court, particularly LCvR 5.1(b), 5.2(a), and 5.4. All rules will be enforced by the Court whether or not they are specifically reiterated in this Scheduling Order. SCHEDULING MATTERS Counsel are directed to contact the Courts Deputy Clerk in the first instance to request rescheduling of court appearances. The party seeking the change in schedule must first confer with counsel for all other parties and be prepared to provide the Deputy Clerk with proposed mutually agreeable dates.

Case 1:11-cv-00408-ABJ Document 91

Filed 03/09/12 Page 5 of 7

Extensions of time to file dispositive motions, status reports, or expert witness designations, or to complete discovery, will be granted as a matter of course if all parties consent and if the extensions will not require a change in any scheduled court appearance (status conference, motion hearing, pretrial conference, trial). But any motion to extend a deadline set by the Court must be filed at least two business days prior to the date to be extended. Motions that do not comply with this requirement, including consent motions, will be denied absent a statement demonstrating good cause for the failure to do so. MOTIONS Motions that do not comply with LCvR 7 may be denied or stricken sua sponte. A party may not file a sur-reply without first requesting leave of the Court. Motions for reconsideration of prior rulings are strongly discouraged. They may be filed only when the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), and/or Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) are met. If such a motion is filed, it shall not exceed ten (10) pages in length. Moreover, the Court may strike: (a) motions which simply reassert arguments previously raised and rejected by the Court; or (b) arguments which should have been previously raised, but are being raised for the first time. See Natl Trust v. Dept of State, 834 F. Supp. 453, 455 (D.D.C. 1995). SO ORDERED.

____________________________ AMY BERMAN JACKSON United States District Judge DATE: March ____, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-00408-ABJ Document 91

Filed 03/09/12 Page 6 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _______________________________________ ) UNITED WESTERN BANK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) OFFICE OF THRIFT SUPERVISION, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________________)

Civil Action No. 11-0408 (ABJ)

[PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER Upon consideration of the parties proposed scheduling orders, it is ORDERED that: 1. Cross-motions for summary judgment will be due by April 27, 2012. 2. Oppositions will be due by May 18, 2012. 3. Replies will be due by May 25, 2012. It is FURTHER ORDERED that counsel read and comply with all of the Local Rules of this Court, particularly LCvR 5.1(b), 5.2(a), and 5.4. All rules will be enforced by the Court whether or not they are specifically reiterated in this Scheduling Order. SCHEDULING MATTERS Counsel are directed to contact the Courts Deputy Clerk in the first instance to request rescheduling of court appearances. The party seeking the change in schedule must first confer with counsel for all other parties and be prepared to provide the Deputy Clerk with proposed mutually agreeable dates. Extensions of time to file dispositive motions, status reports, or expert witness designations, or to complete discovery, will be granted as a matter of course if all parties consent

Case 1:11-cv-00408-ABJ Document 91

Filed 03/09/12 Page 7 of 7

and if the extensions will not require a change in any scheduled court appearance (status conference, motion hearing, pretrial conference, trial). But any motion to extend a deadline set by the Court must be filed at least two business days prior to the date to be extended. Motions that do not comply with this requirement, including consent motions, will be denied absent a statement demonstrating good cause for the failure to do so. MOTIONS Motions that do not comply with LCvR 7 may be denied or stricken sua sponte. A party may not file a sur-reply without first requesting leave of the Court. Motions for reconsideration of prior rulings are strongly discouraged. They may be filed only when the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), and/or Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) are met. If such a motion is filed, it shall not exceed ten (10) pages in length. Moreover, the Court may strike: (a) motions which simply reassert arguments previously raised and rejected by the Court; or (b) arguments which should have been previously raised, but are being raised for the first time. See Natl Trust v. Dept of State, 834 F. Supp. 453, 455 (D.D.C. 1995). SO ORDERED.

_____________________________ AMY BERMAN JACKSON United States District Judge DATE: March ____, 2012