Free Order - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

i · Case 3:03-cv-00986-JC —
i UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT i
{ DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT F E L E D i
ZHIIH MAH 2b A °s 55
A SUSAN E. wooo, CIVIL ACTION NO|t§?, CTT ggggt
y Plaintiff, 3:03-Cv-986 (ICH)
i _ - against — i
si SEMFRA ENERGY TRADING ‘
“` ` CORPORATION, March 25, 2004 i
Q} l §\ Defendant.
l `
l
ig . §\\ OBJECTION TO DEFENDANT·S MOTION FOR MODIFICATION l
`\ Q OF DISFOSITIVE MOTION DEADLINE
4 Plaintiff, Susan E. Wood (“Plaintiff"), hereby objects to the Defendant’s Motion for
"Tl `fication of Dispositive Motion Deadline, dated March 23, 2004 ("Motion for Extension of i
Time").
Support for Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time is based upon the recent
Q modifications to the discovery deadline. The discovery deadline, however, was extended at the
l
request éthelrcvigfendant earlier this year. In seeking the extension to the original discovery
T S lineQ§)ef t reported to the Court that there would not be a need to extend the dispositive
méoiéon dgdlirgajxgid the trial would not be delayed. Given the fact that the Scheduling Order ties A
t§§'date igér trigtgito the Court’s decision on dispositive motions, the extension sought by the
Defendanrtuwill necessarily delay the trial date. Further, Plaintiff asserts that the only open
§ discovery matters are the depositions that Plaintiff needs to complete of the Defendant’s
§ mployees. Those depositions are not necessary for any submission contemplated by the
§ 1
~· l
S l
§$ 5