Free Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 32.6 kB
Pages: 2
Date: April 3, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 407 Words, 2,540 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/43585/42.pdf

Download Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona ( 32.6 kB)


Preview Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

TERRY GODDARD Attorney General CATHERINE M. BOHLAND Assistant Attorney General State Bar No. 022124 1275 W. Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2997 Telephone: (602) 542-4951 Fax: (602) 542-7670 Attorneys for Defendants IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Sheldon Walker, Plaintiff, v. Dora Schriro, et al., Defendants.

No: CV04-0691-PHX-MHM (LOA) RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME (DKT. 40) AND DEFENDANTS' REQUEST TO VACATE THE COURT'S ORDER CONCERNING THE PRETRIAL ORDER

Defendants1, through undersigned counsel, respond to Plaintiff's request for an enlargement of time to file his Response to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. (Dkt. 40) Plaintiff requests that the Court enlarge the amount of time to file his Response for an additional 30 days from March 30, 2006 to April 30, 2006. Defendants do not object to an enlargement of time to April 30, 2006, for Plaintiff to file his Response to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. A Proposed Pretrial Order is currently due on April 14, 2006. Because the parties are in the midst of filing their dispositive motions, Defendants request the Court vacate the deadline for filing the Proposed Pretrial Order until the Court has made a determination as
1

Dora Schriro, Conrad Luna and Barbara Shearer. Document 42 Filed 04/03/2006 Page 1 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-00691-MHM-LOA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

to the pending dispositive motions. Defendants make this request to help serve the interest of judicial economy in an already over-burdened court system. CONCLUSION Defendants do not object to an enlargement of time for Plaintiff to file his Response to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and request the Court vacate its order setting the deadline for filing the Proposed Pretrial Order. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 3rd day of April, 2006. TERRY GODDARD Attorney General

s/Catherine M. Bohland Catherine M. Bohland Assistant Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants

Original e-filed this 3rd day of April, 2006, with: Clerk of the Court United States District Court District of Arizona 401 West Washington Street, SPC 1 Phoenix, AZ 85003-2118 Copy mailed the same date to: Sheldon Walker, #102833 ASPC-Eyman-SMUII Post Office Box 3400 Florence AZ 85232 s/A.Palumbo Legal Secretary to Catherine M. Bohland IDS04-0455/RSK:G #953319

Case 2:04-cv-00691-MHM-LOA

Document 42

2

Filed 04/03/2006

Page 2 of 2