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

Case 1:04-cv-01262-Gl\/IS Document 21 Filed O2/O9/2006 Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
IN RE: ) Chapter 1 1
INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES, )
INC., et al., ) Bankr. Case. N0. 00-389 (MFW)
)
Debtors ) (J ointly Administered)

)
INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY )
OF NORTH AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff ) Civil Action No. 04-1262 GMS
)
v. ) Adversaiy Proceeding No. 03-55550
)
INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES, )
INC. and ABE BRIARWOOD CORP., )
)
Defendants. )
)
ORDER
WHEREAS, on September 14, 2004, Indemnity Insurance Company of North America
("IICNA") filed a motion to withdraw the reference from the Bankruptcy Court in this adversary
proceeding;
WHEREAS, on December 2, 2004, the court granted IICNA’s motion to withdraw the
reference;
WHEREAS, on April 18, 2005, IICNA filed a Motion to Amend the Complaint (D.I. 15);
WHEREAS, pursuant to the District of Delaware Local Rule 7.1 .2(a) (1995), an answer to p
IICNA’s motion was due on May 2, 2005, but neither Abe Briarwood Corporation ("Bria1wood")
nor Integrated Health Services, Inc. ("H·IS") filed an answer to the motion on that date; 1


Case 1:04-cv-01262-Gl\/IS Document 21 Filed O2/O9/2006 Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, on May 12, 2005, Briarwood tiled a Motion for Extension of Time to File a
Response to the Motion to Amend the Complaint (D.I. 16), requesting the court to extend its time
to respond to IICNA’s motion to amend to May 19, 2005, in order to complete its review of the
proposed nineteen page amended complaint;
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2005, Briarwood did not tile a response to IICNA’s motion;
WHEREAS, as of the date of this Order, neither Briarwood nor IHS have filed a response
to the motion;
WHEREAS, on May 31, 2005, IICNA filed a response (D.I. 19) to Briarwood’s motion to
extend time;
WHEREAS, the response contends that Briarwood’s delay in responding to the motion to
amend is "inexcusable" and, therefore, Briarwood should be deemed to have waived any right to
oppose the motion to amend;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), which governs enlargement
requests, it is within the court’s discretion "upon motion made after the expiration ofthe specified
period [to respond to] permit the act to be done where the failure to act was the result of excusable
neglect;"* and
WHEREAS, after having considered the parties’ submissions, the court concludes that both
Briarwood and HJS have waived their rights to oppose IICNA’s motion because their delay in
responding is inexcusable;
’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b),
2

Case 1:04-cv-01262-Gl\/IS Document 21 Filed O2/O9/2006 Page 3 of 3
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Briam/ood’s Motion for Extension of Time to File a Response to the Motion to
Amend the Complaint (D.I. 16) is DENIED.
2. Briaiwvood and IHS have waived any right to oppose IICNA’s motion to amend.
Dated: February , 2006 A V l ‘
UNI STATES DIST ICT IUDG ”
3