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

Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 113

Filed 06/19/2007

Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT PETER D. MAINS and LORI M. MAINS, Plaintiffs v.
SEA RAY BOATS, INC.,

CNIL ACTION NO: 301 CV 2402 (AWT)

Defendant

June 19,2007

MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S FOUR MOTIONS IN LIMINE

Plaintiffs, Peter D. Mains and Lori M. Mains, by and through their counsel, pursuant to Rule 6(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 7(b), hereby move for an extension oftime to respond to four of Defendant's Motions in Limine dated May 29, 2007 (Motion in Limine to Preclude Cumulative Expert Testimony, Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence of Consumer Complaints,Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence of Sea Ray's Conduct Relating to the Sale and Purchase of the Boat), Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence of Exhibit "A") in the above-captionedproceeding and in support thereof respectfullyrepresents as follows:

Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 113

Filed 06/19/2007

Page 2 of 6

1.

Pursuant to Rule 6(b)(1), ''the Court for cause shown may at any time in its

discretion with or without motion or notice order the period enlarged if the request therefore is made before the expiration of the period originallyprescribed or as extended by a previous order." Plaintiffs can meet the "particularized showing that the time limitation cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension" required by Local Rule 7(b) (2).

2.

It is respectfullysubmittedthat sufficient cause exists, pursuant to Rule 6(b), to

enlarge the time to respond to Defendant's Motion for ten (10) days until June 29, 2007. The reasons include the following: Plaintiffs counsel has been involved in the relocation of his law offices over the past 710 days, which move was scheduledprior to the Defendants filing of the four (4) separate Motions in Limine. The office relocation was delayedin process due to bad weather conditions, during which access to internet research and computer capabilitywas intermittentand extremely limited, at best. Plaintiffs' counsel's office relocation is now nearly complete;however, various technical difficulties continue to be experiencedwith computer systems,technology access and research systems. While Plaintiffs' responses to the Defendant's Motions in Limine are in the process of being completed, an Enlargementof Time often (10) days is sought in which to complete the remaining legal research and finalize Plaintiffs' separate responses to each of the

2

Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 113

Filed 06/19/2007

Page 3 of 6

Defendant's four (4) separate Motions in Limine.

3.

The Plaintiff respectfullyrequests that the Court extend the time for Plaintiffs to

respond to Defendant's four motions for ten days, until June 29, 2007.

4.

The length of the extension and potential impact is not significant,and no trial

date has been set.

5. 6.

No party shall suffer prejudice as the result of the requested relief. This is the Plaintiffs' first request for an extension of time with respect to the

subject Motions in Limine.

7.

In accordance with Local Rule 7, Plaintiffs counsel has attempted to confer with

Defendant's counsel to inquire as to Defendant's position regardingthis request for enlargement oftime. 8. Defendant's counsel has advised that the Defendant has no objectionto the

requested ten (10) day extension.

3

Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 113

Filed 06/19/2007

Page 4 of 6

WHEREFORE, for the foregoingreasons, the Defendantsrespectfullyrequest that the Court grant the order annexed hereto and grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. Dated this 19th day of June 2007 at Essex, Connecticut.
PLAINTIFFS PETER D. MAINS and LORI M. MAINS

BY:

Isl John L. Senning John L. Senning, Esq. (ct 05807) 31 North Main Street, 2ndFloor Essex, CT 06426 Tel: 860-767-2618 Fax: 860-767-2740 Email: [email protected] Their Attorney

4

Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 113

Filed 06/19/2007

Page 5 of 6

CERTIFICATION I hereby certifYthat on June 19,2007, a copy of the foregoing MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME was filed electronicallyand served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by email to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronicfiling as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the CM/ECF System.

/s/ John 1. Senning John L. Senning, Esq. (ct 05807)

5

Case 3:01-cv-02402-AWT

Document 113

Filed 06/19/2007

Page 6 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT PETER D. MAINS and LORI M. MAINS, Plaintiffs,
CIVIL ACTION NO: 301 CV 2402 (AWT)

v.
SEA RAY BOATS, INC.,

Defendant.

June 19,2007

ORDER ON MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME

Upon the Motion to Enlarge Time having come before the Court, there being due and adequate notice, and there being due and sufficient cause for the relief sought therein, and the Court being otherwise duly advised; it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is hereby granted, and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall file their Objections to Defendant's four motions in limine
on or before June 29, 2007.

Datedthis-

dayof

,2007, at New Haven, Connecticut.

The Honorable Alvin W. Thompson United States District Court, District of Connecticut

6