Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

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

Document 224

Filed 07/08/2005

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-WM-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 REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO SUPPLEMENT AND AMENDMENT TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBMIT RESPONSES AND MOTION TO RESET HEARING REGARDING SANCTIONS ______________________________________________________________________________ The Plaintiff Robert Alward, by and through his attorneys, and pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(C) hereby replies to Defendants' Response to his Supplement and Amendment to his Motion for Extension of Time to Submit Responses and Motion to Reset Hearing Regarding Sanctions: 1. Defendants do not oppose plaintiff's requested extension of the deadline for Plaintiff's Response to defendant's motion for summary judgment (from July 7 to July 18, 2005) or their Reply (to July 29, 2005). 2. Contrary to defendants' arguments, however, the sanctions issues are not central to this case, or otherwise pressing, and there is no reason to rush the resolution of these issues at the expense of plaintiff's response and reply to the pending motions for summary judgment. Discovery is over. The pretrial phase of this case is almost over. An award of sanctions at this time will have no constructive effect on these proceedings, and there is good cause for the short

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

Document 224

Filed 07/08/2005

Page 2 of 4

extension of the briefings and hearing as requested in plaintiff's supplement. Moreover, there is no good cause for denying plaintiff's request. 3. As set forth in the Court's June 16, 2005 Order [Docket #211], which plaintiff received the day after he filed his Supplement, plaintiff's counsel's response to the Order to Show cause is also due on July 18, 2005, and the objections to the defendants' fee affidavit is due the next day. The hearing on the sanctions issue is set for July 28, 2005. 4. In addition, as set forth in the April 15, 2005 Order, plaintiff's Reply to his Motion for summary judgment is due on July 11, 2006 [sic].1 5. As set forth in Plaintiff's Supplement [Docket #206], filed on June 16, 2005 before plaintiff received notice of the Court's Order of that date, the requested extensions of the briefings and hearing on the sanctions issue is reasonable in light of the briefing schedule for the pending motions for summary judgment, and necessary to allow plaintiff's counsel sufficient time to respond to defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and the Order to Show Cause. If the court denies these requests, plaintiff's counsel will be faced with the impossible task of preparing four major briefs on these significant issues in the span of less than a week. Such a schedule is patently unfair to the plaintiff and his counsel. 6. Also as set forth in Plaintiff's Supplement, plaintiff's counsel was in New York for a jury trial in the Southern District before Judge Preska from June 21 through July 2. Because of the demands of trial, Plaintiff's counsel was not able to devote any time to the briefings in this case. The requested extension will also partially mitigate the fact that plaintiff has effectively had less time than the defendants to prepare the subject briefings.

1

Plaintiff has filed a motion for clarification/extension of time of this deadline.

2

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

Document 224

Filed 07/08/2005

Page 3 of 4

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above and in his Supplement, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court grant his Motion to extend the deadline by which the plaintiff's counsel must: (1) respond to defendants' motion for summary judgment to July 18, 2005; (2) respond to the Order to Show Cause to July 29, 2005; (3) file objections to defendants' application for fees and costs to August 9, 2005; and (4) vacate the hearing on sanctions, currently set for July 28, 2005, and reset that hearing for a date after August 15, 2005. Plaintiff also respectfully requests the court schedule a settlement conference to occur as soon as possible. Dated this 8th day of July 2005. Respectfully submitted, McCLAIN DREXLER, LLC

By: /s/ Nina H. Kazazian Nina H. Kazazian Of Counsel 1700 Lincoln Street Suite 3850 Denver, Colorado 80203-4538 Telephone: (303) 860-8400 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

3

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

Document 224

Filed 07/08/2005

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 8th day of July 2005, I electronically filed the foregoing REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO SUPPLEMENT AND AMENDMENT TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 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 Holme Roberts & Owen LLP 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 4100 Denver, CO 80203 [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS /s/ Nina H. Kazazian

4