Free Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cv-00860-WDM-PAC

Document 225

Filed 07/08/2005

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-M-860 (PAC) ROBERT ALWARD Plaintiff, v. VAIL RESORTS, INC., a Colorado corporation; VAIL CORPORATION, INC. D/B/A/ VAIL ASSOCIATES INC., a Colorado corporation; VR HOLDINGS, INC., a Colorado corporation; and WILLIAM JENSEN, individually and in his official capacity as Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Vail Resorts, Inc. Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO REPLY TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiff Robert Alward, by and through his attorneys, McClain Drexler, LLC, and pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 6 and D.C.COLO.LR 7.1 hereby moves the court for a three day extension of time to reply to defendants' response to his motion for summary judgment, or through and including July 14, 2005. 1. Pursuant to the Court's April 15, 2005 Order, plaintiff's Reply is currently due July 11, 2006 [sic] (Plaintiff understands that the court intended this date to be July 11, 2005). That date has not yet passed. 2. On June 29, 2005, the court granted defendants' request for a two-day extension of time to submit their responses to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [Docket #220]. Defendants did not request, and the court did not grant, a parallel extension for plaintiff's reply.

1

Case 1:04-cv-00860-WDM-PAC

Document 225

Filed 07/08/2005

Page 2 of 3

3. In addition, plaintiff's counsel was in trial before the Southern District of New York from June 21 through July 2, 2005. Consequently, plaintiff's counsel did not have an opportunity to review Defendants' Response until she returned to the office on July 5, 4 . Plaintiff submits that, consistent with the court's June 29 order, these reasons constitute good cause for granting plaintiff the requested three-day extension of time to submit his reply. 5. In compliance with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(A), counsel for the plaintiff contacted counsel for defendants by telephone and email to confer about this motion, but counsel for defendants did not respond. Also, as indicated on the certificate of service, a copy of this motion was served on the plaintiff. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff respectfully requests the court grant plaintiff a three day extension of time, or through and including July 14, 2005, to reply to defendants' response to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. Dated this 8h day of July 2005. McCLAIN DREXLER, LLC

By Nina H. Kazazian Of Counsel 1700 Lincoln Street Suite 3850 Denver, Colorado 80203-4538 Telephone: (303) 860-8400 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff

2

Case 1:04-cv-00860-WDM-PAC

Document 225

Filed 07/08/2005

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 8h day of July 2005, I electronically filed the foregoing PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO REPLY TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to the defendants addressed to the following email address: Sherri Heckel Kuhlmann Christopher Ottele Holme Roberts & Owen LLP 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 4100 Denver, CO 80203 I also certify that a copy of the foregoing was served to the following CM/ECF non-participants by first-class mail, postage prepaid and addressed to the following: Robert Alward 80 Cremery Trail Edwards, CO 80164

3