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

Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 65

Filed 07/20/2006

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT PETER D. MAINS and LORI M. MAINS Plaintiffs, v. SEA RAY BOATS, INC. Defendant. : CIVIL NO. 3:01cv2402 (AWT) : : : : : : : JULY 20, 2006

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME Defendant Sea Ray Division of Brunswick Corporation (improperly designated in the Complaint as "Sea-Ray Boats, Inc.") ("Sea Ray") respectfully moves for an extension of time of seven (7) days until and including, Friday, July 28, in which to respond to plaintiffs' Motion to Compel dated June 30, 2006. This extension of time is required because plaintiffs' motion may be moot and one or more affiants needed to support Sea Ray's opposition to this motion (if it needs to be filed) are currently unavailable. Plaintiffs' motion may be moot because defendant Sea Ray has made one supplemental response with respect to expert disclosure and offered to make another supplemental response regarding other lawsuits, which Sea Ray submits should moot the substantive issues raised by plaintiffs in their motion. The undersigned attempted to contact counsel for plaintiffs, John Senning, on July 13, 14, 17 and 19 to discuss the proposed resolution of plaintiffs' motion to compel, and on July 19, 2006 sent plaintiffs' counsel a letter setting forth this proposal. The undersigned has not received any response to date from plaintiffs' counsel. To the extent that plaintiffs do not agree that their motion is moot in light of Sea Ray's supplemental responses, Sea Ray needs to support its positions with one or more affidavits from Sea Ray personnel, and learned on July 19, 2006 that one or more of these affiants is unavailable.

Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 65

Filed 07/20/2006

Page 2 of 2

In accordance with Rule 7 of the Rules of United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, the undersigned attempted to contact plaintiffs' counsel on Wednesday, July 19 by telephone at approximately 5:00 p.m., and was advised that he was unavailable. Thereafter, the undersigned left a message on the voicemail box of plaintiffs' counsel regarding this request for extension of time to respond to plaintiffs' motion to compel until and including Friday, July 28, 2006. As of the time of the filing of this motion, the undersigned has not received any response from plaintiffs' counsel as to whether he objects or consents to this request for extension of time. This is the first request for extension time filed by Sea Ray with respect to plaintiffs' Motion to Compel. For all of the foregoing reasons, defendant Sea Ray respectfully requests this Court to grant the extension of time for which to respond to plaintiffs' Motion to Compel dated June 30, 2006. DEFENDANT, SEA RAY BOATS, INC. By /s/ James H. Rotondo James H. Rotondo (ct05173) [email protected] Daniel J. Foster (ct24975) [email protected] Day, Berry & Howard LLP CityPlace I Hartford, CT 06103-3499 (860) 275-0100 (860) 275-0343 fax

CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that on this date a copy of foregoing Motion for Extension of Time was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court's CM/ECF System. /s/ James H. Rotondo James H. Rotondo (ct05173) -2-