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

—___-__-ni,-__“_;_
I . . Case 3:03-cv500644-CFD Document 31 Filed 04/23/2004 Page 1 of4
I o sp “
I UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT I I
I DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT I
I
I BRUCE CHARLES RYAN, RUSSELL WILLIAM ) I
I NEWTON, ROBERT FITZPATRICK, and MERIT ) CASE NUMBER: I
I CAPITAL ASSOCIATES, INC., ) 3:03 CV 00644 (CFD) I
)
I Plaintiffs, ) I
I . Ei;
VS- I 2 I I A I
) I I Y . if
NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE ) I so I ·“
coMPANY or PITTSBURGH, PA., me ) z II W Q? A I
AIG TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., ) April 23, 2004 "U I
) EIS} ` AY`? II? `"‘‘ I
Defendants. ) (__, I
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS’
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendants National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA ("National
Union") and AIG Technical Services, Inc. ("AIGTS”) (hereinafter referred to collectively as
"National Union") hereby respectfully move pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(l) and D. Conn. L.
Civ. R. 7(b)(3) for an extension of time to reply to.P1aintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion I
to Dismiss, currently due on April 23, 2004. Defendants move that the Court extend the time for I
such reply until April 26, 2004, at which time, on the current schedule, a similar reply will be
I
due in the companion case of Gwynn, et al., v. National Union, et al., Docket Number 3:03 CV
01 IS4 (CFD) ("Gwynn”).
In support of this motion, undersigned counsel states as followsg I I
I 3 I is I I
1. This is the third request for an extension of time made Nlhtioijal UnlOn . I
rb I
with respect to this time limitation. il: I} -0
(~· :. .J' tslwt
I .;.I, ; -..— 2 _,.- aj I
2. National Union moved to dismiss both actions on January 27,3004, for
failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(b)(6). In response, Plaintiffs subniIIted their
{00068970; lg 0040-3}
pear, ,,.. S ..... . I ,,.. I



l ` Case 3:03-cv-006446 D Document 31 Filed 04/23/2004 Page 2 of 4
Cl)
/ .
/ Memorandum in Opposition to National Union’s Motion to Dismiss, dated February 17, 2004
, ("Plaintiffs’ Oppositi0n").
/ 3. This case, together with the Gwynn action, is one of two (2) actions before
_ this Court based on substantially similar facts. Although both cases are based on different
( Amended Complaints, and the Gwynn matter asserts additional causes of action, the substance of I
{ both actions concern substantially common questions of law and fact. To promote judicial j
economy, among other substantive and procedural benefits, both actions should proceed on a
coordinated schedule. National Union filed a Motion for Status Conference and Coordinated J
Scheduling Order ("Motion for Status Conference") on March l, 2004 to coordinate this action
with the companion Gwynn case. A joint telephonic status conference in both cases is scheduled
to proceed on April 26, 2004. J
4. Plaintiffs in the Gwynn action submitted their Memorandum of Law in I
Opposition to National Union’s Motion to Dismiss on April I2, 2004. As a result, National
Union’s reply in the Gwynn action is not due until April 26, 2004.
5. As stated in National Union’s prior requests for extensions and in the
Motion for Status Conference, an extension of time is necessary here to facilitate the
coordination of this action with Gwynn and conserve judicial resources, promote the just and
efficient conduct of both actions, and serve the convenience of the parties. I
6. Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Plaintiffs in the Gwynn action have
consented to this Motion for Extension.
i
For the reasons stated above, National Union respectfully requests that this court
grant an extension of time within which National Union must reply to Plaintiffs’ Opposition to
iooosswo; 1; 0040-3}
i
i

.___.__ ‘_’”—"’”‘“”`““””‘“’““_‘

,_______________1_
I ’ ‘ Case 3:03-cv-00644-CFD Document 31 Filed 04/23/2004 Page 3 of 4
I Defcndants’ Motion to Dismiss until April 26, 2004, at which time a similar reply will be duo in
thc Gwynn case. I
I
I
I DEFENDANTS NATIONAL UNION FI NCE
` COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA. An ‘
AIG T’EQI;I§I)ZAL SERVICES, INC. I
I in A ‘ /,/. I I
I By: — ‘ Y ——¢<. I
I , Iles R. Hawkins II (ct00l28) I
rf I illiam M. Tong (ct25304)
FINN DIXON & HERLING LLIP I
I One Landmark Square I
I Stamford, CT 06901-2689
T61: (203) 325-5000
Fax: (203) 348-5777 I
Email: [email protected] I
Email: [email protected] I
- . I
I

I
- 3 - I
{00068970; l; 0040-3} I
I
`“—_"__""___i_`MA

" '“"“'“'_""**]
i
i ‘ ’ Case 3:03-cv-006441QFD Document 31 Filed O4/28/QOO4 Page 4 of 4
{ L) Q)
J
` CERTIFICATION i
l
i I hereby certify that a tme and correct copy of the foregoing was mailed, United States
i mail, first class, postage prepaid to the following on this the 23m day of April, 2004:
l i
i Mario DiNatale, Esq. l
Silver, Golub and Teitell ,
184 Atlantic Street
P.O. Box 389 ‘ 9
Stamford, CT 06904 i
Peter M. Nolin, Esq.
Sandak Hennessey & Greco . t
970 Summer Street i
Stamford, CT 06905
» »rerc “ 4 E
Q__W I, q _“ ____,.. j l
m s R. Haw ins II J
9 !
H

- 4 -
{00068970; l; 0040-3} R
wi