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

Case 1:04-cv-01263-REB-KLM

Document 99

Filed 04/07/2006

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-cv-01263-PSF-MEH ROBERT M. FRIEDLAND, Plaintiff, v. TIC ­ THE INDUSTRIAL COMPANY; GEOSYNTEC CONSULTANTS INC. f/k/a GEOSYNTEC, INC. Defendants.

DEFENDANT TIC'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Defendant TIC ­ The Industrial Company ("TIC"), by and through its undersigned counsel, respectfully moves the Court for an extension of time, to and including April 28, 2006, to file a Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment. In support thereof, TIC states as follows: 1. 2. TIC filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on February 8, 2006. On March 31, 2006, Plaintiff filed his Response in Opposition to Defendant TIC ­

The Industrial Company's Motion for Summary Judgment ("Response"). Through an unopposed motion, the Plaintiff's deadline for the Response was extended from March 3, 2006, to March 31, 2006.

Case 1:04-cv-01263-REB-KLM

Document 99

Filed 04/07/2006

Page 2 of 4

3.

On February 16, 2006, this Court granted Defendant GeoSyntec a one-month

extension to file its reply to Plaintiff's response in opposition to GeoSyntec's motion for summary judgment. 4. 17, 2006. 5. TIC requires additional time to file its Reply due to the complex nature of this Pursuant to D.C.Colo.LCivR 7.1(C), TIC's reply to the Response is due on April

case and to prior commitments of key TIC counsel during the entire week of April 10, 2006. 6. 7. the Response. CERTIFICATIONS Pursuant to D.C.Colo.LCivR 7.1(A), counsel for TIC hereby certifies that he has conferred with Plaintiff's counsel, Kirk Mueller, and Mr. Mueller does not oppose the extension requested herein. Pursuant to D.C.Colo.LCivR 6.1(D), as set forth in the Certificate of Service, a copy of this motion has been served on the undersigned's client and all counsel of record. No party will be prejudiced by the delay. TIC has not previously requested an extension of time in which to file its reply to

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court extend the deadline to and including April 28, 2006, for TIC to file a reply to Plaintiff's Response.

-2-

Case 1:04-cv-01263-REB-KLM

Document 99

Filed 04/07/2006

Page 3 of 4

Respectfully submitted this 7th day of April 2006.

s/ Colin C. Deihl Colin C. Deihl, Esq. Faegre & Benson, LLP 3200 Wells Fargo Center 1700 Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80202-4532 Attorneys for Defendant TIC

-3-

Case 1:04-cv-01263-REB-KLM

Document 99

Filed 04/07/2006

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 7th day of April 2006, a true and correct copy of the foregoing DEFENDANT TIC'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT was electronically filed via ECF with the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado and served electronically or via first-class U.S. mail on the following: John D. Fognani, Esq. R. Kirk Mueller, Esq. Lauren C. Buehler, Esq. Fognani & Faught, PLLC 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 2222 Denver, Colorado 80203 Terrence M. Ridley, Esq. Steven M. Kelso, Esq. Wheeler Trigg Kennedy, LLP 1801 California Street, Suite 3600 Denver, CO 80202-2617 Paul J. Sanner, Esq. Hanson, Bridgett, Marcus, Vlahos & Rudy, LLP 333 Market Street, Suite 2100 San Francisco, CA 94105-2122 Colin D. Reid Vice President/General Counsel TIC Holdings, Inc. 2211 Elk River Road P.O. Box 774848 Steamboat Springs, CO 80477

s/ Jan Sullivan
DNVR1:60340787.01