Free Order on Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

I r . I l . I
Case 3:00-cv-OO97&AHN Document 62 Filed O1/ZQIZOO4 Pag¢®l1.`i@l**`lC—l7.5r1] €)(I€,»bI
I · D Q
E O I- tr
I KO UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ii" i i-. D
I DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
I ZUUUJANZI l-D 3:llq
I TIMOTHY HAYES, U -. C..|.,II H In {_
I Case N0.: 3:00CV0973 i
Plaintiff, ‘
I -against- I
I · i COMPASS GROUP USA, INC., d/b/a EUREST
DININ G SERVICES and CARY ORLANDI, I
i ll . ~ li?. Z Defendants. JANUARY 21, 2004
I 3 VT I
I Q:.?MOTION FOR ONE-DAY EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S I
Q :” L Q OPPOSITION TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT i
gg >——¤ A I
2 I Q I
E _ j Pursuant to D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 7(b)2, defendants Compass Group USA, Inc. ("Compass
3; §}roup") and Cary Orlandi (collectively "defendants") move for leave to file the accompanying ·
@2 Reply to Plaintiff s Opposition To Summary Judgment, as well as the Affidavit of Counsel and a
ng m ’
93-I Ei: related Motion to Strike, one day after expiration of the deadline for tiling the reply. In support I
5 J
.......-r gg of this motion, defendants state: I
,»*'
1. Counsel for defendants has attempted to confer with counsel for plaintiff to obtain _
his assent to this motion, but has been unable to reach plaintiffs counsel (defendants are
informed that plaintiffs counsel has been in court and unable to respond).
2. The deadline for tiling reply papers in connection with defendants’ motion for I
summary judgment was January 20, 2004. Det`endants’ reply (and accompanying submissions)
was drafted by trial counsel in Boston and reviewed by Connecticut counsel. The reply, together
I
with a related motion to strike certain of plaintiff s exhibits from the record, was finalized and
electronically transmitted to Connecticut counsel at approximately 2:30 p.m. on January 20,
‘ I
I
- —- ee rr -- --. Y- . -.L- . -.-_ In L ___ ____,___g
to —- —— rr ee . --. N- I- . -- __ is ,___,,___