“’ .. . N,
3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT "
N DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
my -—? I l¤ 52
5 THOMAS O’CONNOR * CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:00_ CV 339 (RNC)
gg Pramurr, jg i »
5; V. * (
C: ek
O LYNNE B. PIERSON, et al. *
E Defendants. MH * *****1** MAY 2, 2006
rg ******·»*********-:»*************** wi sk in
B I PLAlNTlFF'S REQUEST FOR A RULE 16 STATUS CONFERENCE
E The plaintiff requests that the court schedule a Rule 16 status conference as
I
3 \ E soon as possible. This is a six-year old case and it is currently stalled in a procedural
C: . .·-J
§ I morass. The plaintiff requests the conference in order to sort out through the issues
I-I4
S Q and to make a plan for adjudication as soon as possible.
U cn
2 EE On November 10, 2005 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals remanded this case
*·‘ IZ
FU
§ back to the District Court. On November 30, 2005, the court referred this matter to
U Z
Q ld Magistrate Judge Smith for a settlement conference. The settlement conference was
O GJ
F§· 2; held on February 22, 2006. Prior to the settlement conference, on January 17, 2006,
I--I
F5 the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, which they later were forced to
ei
_ admit was done in contravention of the court’s procedure for filing dispositive motions.
·-Cj .
ij E On March 2, 2006 the court referred the pre—filing conference to Magistrate Judge
E E
5 E Smith, but on April 12, 2006 the court withdrew that referral.
2 tg The plaintiff is seeking to determine whether or not there will be a summary
0
N ,»·§ judgment motion. lf a summary judgment motion is going to be entertained, the plaintiff
xo as
‘;. O is seeking 1) a schedule for filing and responding to the motion; and 2) a trial date in the
O
I-] ¤.
.2 2 event the motion is denied. lf the summary judgment is not going to be entertained, the
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms