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

| I r7rH_;—————-_·__ _.` ' ·—·~···——-———
Case 3:00-cv-00316-WWE Document 95 Filed 07/07/2004 Page 1 of 1
I Fat ro
" UNITED STATES DISTRICT COEUKITJUL ... 2 A q, H5
_ DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT I
(Bmdgeport) tgt;. rDI_S_TRlCT COURT I
;-»RIrJtrE.PUR1`. CIM-:
I CADLE COMPANY ) CIVIL ACTION _
) .
I v. ) MASTER DOCKET NO 3:00cv316 (WWE) _&
) .
i I GRACE JONES ) PLEADING APPLCABLE TO:
) NO: 3:00cv316 (WWE) I
CADLE COMPANY ) NO: 3:00cv317 (WWE)
’ I
, v. )
I ’ I
I DOROTHY MURREN ) JULY 1, 2004
QEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO
PéAINTIFF’S JUNE 14 SUPPLEMENTAL POST-TRIAL MEMORANDUM I
N tie
i Tihe degridants in both consolidated cases move the court pursuant to F RCP Rule 6(b) I
U— “ · QC? I
8 ap,Q,,H.ocaIlIRule§(§{·i) for an extension of time to reply to the plaintiff s June 14, 2004
cl gg ei .
(If s emeggal peigtrral memorandum to July 23, 2004. .
· QI Defendants’ counsel has good cause for requesting this extension. On or about June 15, ,
·j"'·-· `
T , defendants? counsel received a request to amend a complaint and the plaintiffs I
%pplemenotal post-trial memorandtun. The defendants’ counsel prepared and filed an objection I
I ru I
—IiI §> the request to amend. However, because of other time commitments, defendants’ counsel has I
gnsufticient time to respond to the post—trial memorandum. I
==· I
5 Detendants’ counsel has conferred with plaintiffs counsel, and he agrees to the granting I
F I ggf this motilon. This is the defendants’ first motion to extend the time to respond to the June 14,
I r
$-2 I ( I
.*5; I
It ..·. -
rw I I:
rl
€i?r?*?i%'*’$?·?$>“?-¤¤5j”e>*e5‘#·=Reged-——~—=-~ · —-
.4 u W