Free Response - District Court of Colorado - Colorado


File Size: 42.7 kB
Pages: 3
Date: September 6, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Colorado
Category: District Court of Colorado
Author: unknown
Word Count: 439 Words, 2,760 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cod/24418/154.pdf

Download Response - District Court of Colorado ( 42.7 kB)


Preview Response - District Court of Colorado
Case 1:04-cv-00093-ZLW-BNB

Document 154

Filed 09/06/2005

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action Number: JOSÉ D. RAMIREZ, Plaintiff, v. SERGEANT NEVINS, Unit 3, Defendants. 04-cv-93-ZLW-BNB

DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S "EXTENSION & DISABILITY CONSIDERATION OBJECTIONS" Defendant SERGEANT NEVINS, by and through his attorneys, CAIN & HAYTER, LLP, and pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1, hereby files Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's "Extension & Disability Consideration Objections," [filed on August 23, 2005, and entered on the Court's docket on September 2, 2005 as document number 148], and states as follows: 1. Defendant construes Plaintiff's Motion as a combined Motion for Appointment of Counsel (the third such Motion filed in this case) and Motion for Enlargement of Time in which to Respond to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. 2. Defendant filed his Motion for Summary Judgment on July 22, 2005, which was entered as document number 138 on the Court's docket. To date, Plainitff has not filed his Response to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.

Page 1 of 3

Case 1:04-cv-00093-ZLW-BNB

Document 154

Filed 09/06/2005

Page 2 of 3

3.

Defendant does not object to a reasonable enlargement of time for Plaintiff to file his response to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment; however, there are no facts in the record that illustrate the Plaintiff cannot proceed, pro se, as he has been in this litigation.

4.

Plaintiff has not met his burden of convincing the court that there is sufficient merit to his claim to warrant the appointment of counsel. See Hill v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., 393 F.3d 111 (10th Cir. 2004).

5.

Defendant denies any and all allegations that CDOC has in any way attempted to make things harder for the Plaintiff to pursue his litigation. Respectfully submitted this 6TH day of September, 2005.

Duly signed original is on file at the office of CAIN & HAYTER, LLP /s/ Kristine K. Hayter Kristine K. Hayter, No. 30357 CAIN & HAYTER, LLP 128 South Tejon, Suite 100 Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903 Telephone: (719) 575-0010 Email: [email protected] Attorney for Defendant Nevins

Page 2 of 3

Case 1:04-cv-00093-ZLW-BNB

Document 154

Filed 09/06/2005

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 6TH day of September, 2005, a true and correct copy of the foregoing DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S "EXTENSION & DISABILITY CONSIDERATION OBJECTIONS," was placed in the United States Mail, postage prepaid and addressed to the following: Jose D. Ramirez, Prisoner No. 52124 Limon Correctional Facility Unit Seg. C 1-4 49030 State Hwy. 71 Limon, CO 80826 /s/ Kristi Holtzberg Kristi Holtzberg, Paralegal

Page 3 of 3