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

] -J-·*‘" ` e 2:91 —cv—001 80-RNC Document 490 Filed 12/13/2004 Page 1 Of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT J. Q
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
. Zllllli gg _ Q
\ P.J., et al., : CIVIL NO. H _` A IO: 5/4
I Plaintiffs, : 29lCV00l80 (RNC) ._v-‘ ;t?$,,»~ T In _
V. I ‘ ‘ ' -- {Tit?/";’:‘!· T
l . 4 J
STATE OF CONNECTICUT, et al. : 7
Defendants. : DECEMBER 8, 2004 i
. MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME I
The plaintiffs request a one week enlargement of the time within which to tile their r
Reply to Defendants’ Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Further
Attomeys’ Fees and Costs. In support of this Motion the plaintiffs represent the following:
I. The plaintiffs’ Motion for Attomeys’ Fees and Costs was tiled on October 4,
2004. [Doc. ## 482, 483.]
2. Defendants’ Memorandum in Opposition to the Motion for Attomeys’ Fees and {
.5] Costs was filed on November I7, 2004 [Doc. #485]. i
9 fi '
,g 3. Under Local Rule 7(d) plaintiffs’ Reply brief was due on December I, 2004. y
M ' e
E I 4. On November 22, 2004 the plaintiffs moved for an enlargement of the December i
{D "` Ul
' El Q l, 2004 date due to counsel’s vacation schedule and demands of other cases. [Doc. #487].
*'(j LF rg]
ig U 5. On November 29, 2004, the Court granted the Motion and ordered the filing of the
rv 1 A 2
5 _- U Re 1 on December 13, 2004. [Doc. #488].
F. ] . H P Y
- cu
qi `* ` rg 6. Since then plaintiffs have determined that the transcript of the Status Conference
c> me
g held by the Court on November 19, 2001 may be helpful in addressing defendants’ argument
·. l·"
3 Effrjat pliéigrtiffs have waived their right to costs and attomeys’ fees incurred during the five
3 0;;
§ r ··
E13 @5 1_ .
~ ·raa r --