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


File Size: 48.5 kB
Pages: 1
Date: October 16, 2003
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 376 Words, 2,410 Characters
Page Size: 612.72 x 1008 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/23001/39.pdf

Download Order on Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Connecticut ( 48.5 kB)


Preview Order on Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Connecticut
. as ";——·~r——;—~—~—-——————~—————-»·-~——-»-».»-—..-——..__;..r_-... L._I__
I Case 3:03-cv—0O63OJS Document 39 Filed 10/1 *03 Page 1 of 1
Q UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
g DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT I
E ‘ j
>_, MARIO RICHARDS, ; _ gy , ‘ I
Q on behalf of himself and : CIVIL ACTKIIW NO? °
E, { all others similarly situated ; 3:03 CV00630 ggjg A
M PLAINTIFFS, ; iélériiv t Ii I
·¤ : » W
V. : 'U lg
·¤ ° G ig V`?
2 COMPUTER SCIENCES : gf:} /
CORPORATION : October 7, 2003 $#1 Q
3 DEFENDANT.
"‘ I
Tcl I
§ PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME
m RE: DISCLOSURE OF EXPERTS ` X
C I I ‘ ; ` _ II] ,` I-_. . ‘
-;-2 Plaintilf, Mario Richards, requests pursuant to Local Rule 7 (b) that the court I
tg grant an enlargement of time to November 21, 2003 to disclose experts in this matter.
{D • I
:8 E It would be an inefficient use of experts’ time to obtain opinions at this time. This is the I
*1-I C1 ‘ I
G, Fg itirst request for enlargement of time in this matter. I
Q eu I
gi .0 I
Q Q Procedural Background
‘¤ I
g g ZL Tlieplaintifh Mario Richards, commenced this action on April 7, 2003 pursuant
.u :>. gl i-ir ·;_; QJ I
`3 3 4%] to thelliair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq. (FLSA), claiming wages for I
Q. ·-c ' L_ '='` fi
_ if E 6* [ bvertiine hotnrsivvorked in excess of forty hours per week. The parties tiled a Rule 26 (t) I
E \I`$l - I I report ajscheduling order was entered by the court (Squatrito, J.) wherein the plaintiff I
G R q W? élrequired to disclose expert witnesses on or before October 7, 2003.
, ._ _ , :>
I . _ 3
` -.,, geason for Reguest
3 °° ‘ . .
' I *‘ Plaintiff served discovery requests on the defendant, ie. request for mterrogatories I
! I 3 I
nz:. ‘ Y l
Q · aa May 3, 2003 and request for production dated June 4, 2003. Defendant objected to
, r
` g I it I
\· ts I? I I
3 .·-.z t .. 2
E ` :7 I
I
i .t.,_.
:;;;;;ELf_{;i;_j;_r_i_;ZL, ._ L_ __ _i __ 7 _ _ 7 _ TW-_r7__n 7
jé;;;;_;_i tri_i.'. ti :.1 ‘ ' ' ' ‘ ' ’ '" ' ' I 7 _ T rm T7__r7U -