Free Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

I Case 3:00-cv-OOQKESAEHN Document 50 Filed 11/2@>O3 Rage ;]»c¢1?P__·i Wl »f‘°y¥’“i‘ `i I I
I if-`F rs:
I I I i IIN., {gm D
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT mu} NOV [ '[ ID I2: I I) I
I
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT US liifi I`;--{II I__· I
Bti}i;F¥YV_*’z_t`§`$ Iii I I
TIMOTHY HAYES : CIVIL ACTION NO: Mme, I
Plaintiff : 3:00CV0973(AHN)(HBF) I
v. : I
COMPASS GROUP USA, INC.,
d/b/a EUREST DINING SERVICES :
and CARY ORLAN DI : November 14, 2003
Defendants : I
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME IN WHICH
IMI TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
E Pursuant to Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Procedure and Local Rule 9(b) the plaintiff in I

§;’·;fthe above—captioned matter respectfully moves for the initial extension of time of 30 days which I
> $ I
_ 5 may be granted by the clerk as provided for in Local Rule 9(b)(l), representing as follows: I
ci 2
0 Ig l) The plaintiff received a 220 page Motion for Summary Judgment from the
ts; "
ii l gdefendant on October 31, 2003.
2) Local Rule 9(b)(l) provides for 2l days within which to file required responses I
5 if-to a motion for summary judgment. I
\ £ 3) Previous professional and personal commitments of counsel for the plaintiff
precludes plaintiffs counsel from preparing and filing an appropriate response to the defendant’s
T Motion for Summary Judgment.
.0 1
;r =
U- ~_ iiii I ·.`' A it
I li il `Q rl·` I
·,‘,_.L=:-J j _, . , . I
N
iiflll. r;o?I·.I,;_i I
I
{E3 :2 I
-