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

°é== @@3-cv-OO·RNC Document 91 Filed 08/0.004 Page 1 of 1 p
. THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR -
A . DISTRICT OPI CONNECTICUT ? I
RICHARD A. MYERS, ETAL. ml, AUG -5, D 3= 38
*""““‘“* , gg ctw I
i CIVIL ACTIOIWIIIOIE §E0Si6\I1OO373 (RNC)
V. ! UN']
TOWNSHIP OF TRUMBULL, ET AL. I
Defendant. I AUGUST 5, 2004I V
is MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT _ V
g I The defendant, Westfield Shoppingtown Trumbull ("Westfie1d"), by its
1· I` attorneys, and pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 6gb) and D.Conn. L. Civ. R. 7(b), moves
' * R this Honorable Court for the entry of an order granting Westfield an extension of ten
E I (10) days up to and including August 17, 2004, to file its Reply to the Plaintiffs’
Memorandtun of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ,
\; - ~· I II dated July 26, 2004. In support thereof, Westfield states as follows: II
* X. 1. The Plaintiffs filed their Memorandum of Law in Opposition to
Ig Motion for Summary Judgment on or about July 28, 2004. _ I
I 2. Pursuant to Local Rule 7(d), the due date for Westfie1d’s Reply to I
Q.
Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment is
B_ . - August 7, 2004. I
g 3. From July 26, 2004 through August 4, 2004, the undersigned counsel
\ 2 te. . . .. . .
`*><> wasiin the Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of New Haven. As a
resgi-t of lgéguijial commitment, I have not had sufficient time to review the plaintiffs' S
A prepare a Reply to the Plaintiffs’ Memorandum in Opposition.
oecvavzm, O