Free Order on Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Colorado - Colorado


File Size: 8.6 kB
Pages: 2
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Colorado
Category: District Court of Colorado
Author: unknown
Word Count: 310 Words, 1,846 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cod/20723/79.pdf

Download Order on Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Colorado ( 8.6 kB)


Preview Order on Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Colorado
Case 1:03-cv-02420-RPM

Document 79

Filed 04/24/2006

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch Civil Action No. 03-cv-02420-RPM SHARI McCARLEY, REX ALLEN McCARLEY and JUDY ARBGAST for and on behalf of JESSICA McCARLEY, a minor, individually and as heirs of REX McCARLEY, deceased, Plaintiffs, v. AEC OIL & GAS (USA), INC., d/b/a BALLARD PETROLEUM HOLDINGS, LLC, KEY ENERGY SERVICES, INC., and WEATHERFORD HOLDING U.S., INC., d/b/a WEATHERFORD U. S. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Defendants.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

This matter is scheduled for a pretrial conference on May 2, 2006, at 10:00 a.m. by this Court' order of March 14, 2006. On April 21, 2006, the plaintiff filed a motion to s continue the pretrial conference and for an extension of time to respond to Defendant AEC Oil and Gas (USA), Inc.' renewed motion for summary judgment. The motion s, recites that two of counsel for the plaintiffs have been on vacation and that the parties are engaged in settlement negotiations. It is noted that a status report filed on August 1, 2005, indicated that a settlement conference was to be held on August 23rd, 2005. It appears to this Court that there has been ample time for settlement negotiations and the motion to continue the pretrial conference has been filed more than one month

Case 1:03-cv-02420-RPM

Document 79

Filed 04/24/2006

Page 2 of 2

since it was set. It is ORDERED that the motion to continue pretrial conference is denied and it is FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiffs will have to and including April 27, 2006, within which to respond to the renewed motion for summary judgment. Dated: April 24th, 2006 BY THE COURT: s/Richard P. Matsch ___________________________________ Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

2