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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ernest B. Jackson, Plaintiff, v. ABC Nissan, Inc., et al.,

13 Defendants. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CIV 03-563-PHX-SMM ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for an Extension of Time in which to Respond to Defendant's Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement. [Doc. No. 137] According to Plaintiff, he had until June 7, 2007, to file a response to Defendant's Motion to Enforce the Settlement Agreement. The Court finds Plaintiff's computation of the time in which he was to file a response is erroneous in light of the fact that Plaintiff received notice of Defendant ABC Nissan, Inc.'s Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement and Supporting Brief on May 18, 2007.1 Nonetheless, the Court finds that a responsive brief will assist in the resolution the pending motion. // //

Plaintiff is advised to consult Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and LRCiv 7.2 of the Local Rules of Practice for the District of Arizona, which provide the rules governing the computation of time for filing a responsive memorandum.
Case 2:03-cv-00563-SMM Document 138 Filed 06/07/2007 Page 1 of 2

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED Plaintiff's Motion for an Extension of Time in which to Respond to Defendant's Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement [Doc. No. 137] is GRANTED IN PART as follows: Plaintiff shall have through Monday, June 11, 2007, to respond to Defendant's Motion to Enforce the Settlement Agreement. DATED this 7th day of June, 2007.

-2Case 2:03-cv-00563-SMM Document 138 Filed 06/07/2007 Page 2 of 2