Free Order - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 47.3 kB
Pages: 2
Date: July 27, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 375 Words, 2,552 Characters
Page Size: 612.72 x 1008 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22900/21.pdf

Download Order - District Court of Connecticut ( 47.3 kB)


Preview Order - District Court of Connecticut
i 1 Case 3:03-cv-00970®D Document 21 Filed 07/19@O4 Page 1 of 2
1
l UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ,M
y DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ;`jffFX3
· 4.4 /51 S p =
{ MARTIN DICKINSON : FV H. ` ’*iH'@n .
: ,ERISONER,.
I v. z case No. 3“:**0·‘3i¤:v97_0{ (JGM)
i j {
i KEITH SCOTT, ET AL. \
` SECOND ORDER OF NOTICE TO PRO SE LITIGANT {
i On February l8, 2004, the court sent out an Order of Notice f
` to Pro Se Litigant directing the plaintiff to respond to
i defendants’ motion to dismiss. In response, the plaintiff sought
an extension of time to respond to the motion. On May 7, 2004,
the court granted the plaintiff an extension of time until May {
27, 2004, to respond to the motion. The plaintiff has failed to I
file his response or seek an additional extension of time to V
respond to the motion. Accordingly, the court issues the `
following notice. I
Rule 7(a), D. Conn. L. Civ. R., requires the plaintiff to ’
file his response to the defendants’ motion to dismiss within
twenty-one days from the date the motion was filed. The
plaintiff has failed to file opposition to the motion to dismiss.
The court again gives express notice to the ppg sg plaintiff that }
“failure to submit a memorandum in opposition to [the] motion may {
be deemed sufficient cause to grant the motion,” Rule 7(a), D.
Ccnn. Loc. Civ. P., and that if plaintiff fails to file his
l opposition to the motion to dismiss or fails to obtain an l
,.,_é _ it-Q ?—· Z
_aeaeE3;E;;geeaeeeenaaaEQIliIIiiiT"vvvrvr·r·r~———a—-—e—e~—e-e*~4.r.eiln.iiiL_i_L__y

K

—?._ 7’>é‘ ·=?= z"?
aeeeaeaaeaageeeeaeeeeaEQQ;IETiZi`T‘f*"`vvvrv~———e—-—~———e—~»—e—e.e.nlrnnL_n_L_

)

l .
I .. · Case 3:03-cv-OO970®D Document 21 Filed 07/19[2QD4 Page2of2
} extension of time for filing his opposition on or before August
) gi, 20%, the defendants’ motion will be granted at that time.
\ If the motion to dismiss is granted, the complaint will be
, dismissed and the case will be closed. I
” \ —L~.
l :50 ORDERED at New Haven, Connecticut, this cx day of
July, 2004. ¤~ - p
l
n . Margolis {
Unite tes Magistrate Judge ,
E 1
Q
I
···——·"···*"*·**··*‘***·—'*""*·‘•·"”"' -`°°i'—" """` -- _