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


File Size: 43.4 kB
Pages: 1
Date: December 24, 2003
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 350 Words, 2,056 Characters
Page Size: 612.72 x 1008 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/23074/29.pdf

Download Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Motion - District Court of Connecticut ( 43.4 kB)


Preview Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Motion - District Court of Connecticut
""""' '“'”"'"""" "“"""" ““"_""*·-·—*—·—*·“··U—~·—————·———-»~-—I——————·’ ·-»--III. ' I ._-- ________,___
Case 3:03-cv-OO70(3—S)FD Document 29 Filed I;I2iL§OO Il 3E6QBJiboIK ¢> ‘ . I
I I
I ILE D I
. I
I A II= IH I
UNITED STATES DISTRICT C0 RT mu BEC q I
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICU'lI I IS UISTTFRIIIIIIB CIIIIIIRI
i I ” °
CENTRIX, INC., I I I
: Civil Action No. IJ:0 I CV 703 (CFD) I
Plaintifi : I
: I I I
V- . = I I I
. r I I
ANDON BRUSH COMPANY, INC., ; I I I
. I I
TI I I Defendant. : DECEMBEII 18, IOOI I
I is = I I
I A, I I I
C · I
·` .
é I§@’IOTION EoR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PL IN I IFES, CENTRIX
Q A NCJS RULE; 12 MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE SETT EMI N I [sie] OIR IN THE
»‘= ;° LTERNATI-YE TO STRIKE AND/OR TO DISMISS C0U TE C I AIM COUNTS II,
· _ AI 5. QIIII, IV Fon FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE E C ION I
5 II Ii; “ I
Ig. M iii I
§ :,,9 » -~ D€`£_”¤¤dé¤t.AI¤d¤¤ Brush Company, Inc. ("Andcm"), by it un ers gned eeueeei, hereby
LE i` ¥
(D O Dvics thi_s~;CotIrt‘for an extension of time of thirty (30) days to anu y 16, 2004 for Andon to
I respond to Plaintiffs, Centrix Inc., Rule 12 Motion For More DeIiI·iite Iett ement [sic] Or In The
Alternative To Strike And/Or To Dismiss Counterclaim Counts II,I III, IIV 'I or Failure To State A
I I
Cause of Action. In support of its motion Andon States as t`ollowsI I ‘ I
= I
I
l. Defendant Andon was recently required to change I:ounIel n this action when its I
original counsel, McCarter and English, developed a conflict Iif irIter St (by reason of the I
I
acquisition of a portion of Cummings & Lockwood), which requi1Ied thIem o withdraw from this I
I .
action. I I I
I
I I I
I I
I I I
I I I
I I I