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


File Size: 12.1 kB
Pages: 2
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Colorado
Category: District Court of Colorado
Author: unknown
Word Count: 287 Words, 2,064 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cod/21223/211.pdf

Download Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Colorado ( 12.1 kB)


Preview Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply - District Court of Colorado
Case 1:03-cv-02669-MSK-PAC

Document 211

Filed 02/14/2006

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Honorable Marcia S. Krieger Case No. 03-cv-02669-MSK-PAC LEPRINO FOODS COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. BIG-D CONSTRUCTION CORP.- CALIFORNIA, a Utah corporation, Defendant/Counterclaimant, and BIG-D CONSTRUCTION CORP., a Utah corporation, BIG-D CORPORATION, a Utah corporation, BIG-D CAPITAL CORP., a Wyoming corporation, and Does 1-100, inclusive, Defendants

BIG-D CONSTRUCTION CORP.- CALIFORNIA, a Utah corporation, BIG-D CONSTRUCTION CORP., a Utah corporation, and Does 1-100, inclusive, Third Party Plaintiffs, v. MARELICH MECHANICAL CO., INC. dba UNIVERSITY MARELICH MECHANICAL, a California corporation, Third Party Defendant.

Case 1:03-cv-02669-MSK-PAC

Document 211

Filed 02/14/2006

Page 2 of 2

MARELICH MECHANICAL CO., INC. dba UNIVERSITY MARELICH MECHANICAL, a California corporation, Third Party Plaintiff/Counterclaimant, v. BIG-D CONSTRUCTION CORP. - CALIFORNIA, a Utah corporation, FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, an Indiana corporation, Roes 20 through 80, inclusive, Counterdefendant/Third Party Defendants. _________________________________________________________________________ ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF' MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT S OF TIME AND TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION _________________________________________________________________________ THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff' Motion for Enlargement of Time s to File Reply Brief in Support of its Motion for Summary Adjudication and Motion to Exceed Page Limitation of Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Summary Adjudication (#210). Good cause having been shown, IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff' Motion (#210) is GRANTED. The Plaintiff may s file a reply brief in support of its Motion for Summary Adjudication that does not exceed twenty pages. The Plaintiff shall have to and including February 21, 2006, within which to file such reply brief. Dated this 14th day of February, 2006 BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger United States District Judge