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


File Size: 71.0 kB
Pages: 2
Date: June 1, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 312 Words, 2,082 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/23001/113.pdf

Download Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Motion - District Court of Connecticut ( 71.0 kB)


Preview Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Motion - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-00630-DJS

Document 113

Filed 06/02/2006

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT MARIO RICHARDS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated PLAINTIFFS, v. COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION DEFENDANT. : : : : : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:03 CV00630 (DJS)

MAY 31, 2006

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME RE: MOTION TO COMPEL Plaintiff, Mario Richards and other plaintiffs, request pursuant to Local Rule 7 (b) that the court grant an enlargement of time to June 16, 2006 to file a memorandum in response to defendant's motion to compel responses to interrogatory and production requests dated December 8, 2005. Procedural Background The plaintiff, Mario Richards, commenced this action on April 7, 2003 pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq. (FLSA), claiming wages for overtime hours worked in excess of forty hours per week. Reason for Request Defendant served approximately seventy-one (71) interrogatory requests containing eleven (11) interrogatories each and seventy-one (71) production requests containing seven (7) requests each on seventy-one plaintiffs on or about December 10, 2005. Plaintiffs have been working on responses to said requests. Plaintiffs further

Case 3:03-cv-00630-DJS

Document 113

Filed 06/02/2006

Page 2 of 2

desire to file a responsive memorandum to defendant's motion to compel. Additional time is required in order to properly respond to defendant's motion to compel. Counsel for the plaintiffs has been busy recently working on an appellate brief in the Second Circuit in Absher v. Flexi International Software. Opposing Counsel Counsel for the defendant does not object to plaintiffs' request.

Plaintiff, Mario Richards

By_______________________ Michael J. Melly Fed. Bar No. ct17841 143 Oneco Avenue Suite 4 New London, CT 06320 Tel: (860) 447-1990

CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was mailed on To: Tasos C. Paindiris, Esq. William Anthony, Esq. 90 State House Sq. Hartford, Ct 06103 _____________________ Michael J. Melly