Free Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

TERRY GODDARD Attorney General KELLEY J. MORRISSEY Assistant Attorney General State Bar No. 016158 1275 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2926 Telephone: (602) 542-4951 Fax: (602) 542-7670 Attorneys for Defendants IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA DANNY MILLER, Plaintiff, v. DONALD SLOAN, et al., Defendants. No. CV 04-19-PHX-DGC (LOA) DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT TO REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THEIR CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. RULE 6(b) (First Request)

Defendants1 move for a fourteen day enlargement to reply to Plaintiff's Response to Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment for the following reasons: Plaintiff mailed his Response to the Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on August 26, 2005.2 The Defendant's reply in support of their CrossMotion for Summary Judgment is due on September 6, 2005. The Defendants are unable to file their Reply because undersigned counsel has been engaged in the following: preparation of numerous discovery responses and a motion for summary judgment in Byerly v. Schriro, et al., U.S.D.C. No. 04-0323 PHX-FJM (GEE) filed

1 2

Donald Sloan, Ronolfo Macabuhay, and Richard Pratt. Plaintiff's Response was not received until August 30, 2005.
Document 81 Filed 09/06/2005 Page 1 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00019-DGC

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

September 1, 2005; preparation of a reply in support of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss in Boyce v. Schriro, et al., U.S.D.C. No. 04-0293 PHX ROS (SLV) due September 6, 2005; as well as responses to numerous discovery requests in several of counsel's cases. Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 6(b) provides that this court may exercise its discretion to enlarge litigation deadlines. Defendants submit that the circumstances set forth above constitute sufficient cause for this court to exercise its discretion to grant the requested enlargement. The enlargement being sought will not be prejudicial to the Plaintiff and is not being made for purposes of delay, but out of necessity. Therefore, for the reasons set forth above, Defendants respectfully request a fourteen day enlargement of time to reply in support of their Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED on this 6th day of September, 2005. TERRY GODDARD Attorney General

s/ Kelley J. Morrissey KELLEY J. MORRISSEY Assistant Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants

Case 2:04-cv-00019-DGC

Document 81

2

Filed 09/06/2005

Page 2 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

ORIGINAL and One copy of the foregoing filed this 6th day of September, 2005, with: Clerk of the Court United States District Court District of Arizona 401 West Washington Phoenix, AZ 85003 Copyth the foregoing has been mailed of this 6 day of September, 2005, to:_ _ Danny L. Miller, # 109729 Arizona State Prison Complex ­ Tucson Santa Rita Unit ­ 3-D-17 P.O. Box 24406 10012 South Wilmot Road Tucson, AZ 85734-4406 Plaintiff Pro Per s/ A. Palumbo Secretary to Kelley J. Morrissey
IDS04-0395/RM#G2003-04642 922925

Case 2:04-cv-00019-DGC

Document 81

3

Filed 09/06/2005

Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 This matter, having come before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Enlargement to Reply in Support of Their Cross Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 6(b); and cause appearing for said application; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the time for the Defendants' to reply in support of their Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is enlarged for fourteen days from the date this Order is filed. DATED this ____ day of _____________, 2005. v. DONALD SLOAN, et al., Defendants. DANNY MILLER, Plaintiff, ORDER No. CV 04-19-PHX-DGC (LOA) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Case 2:04-cv-00019-DGC

Document 81

4

Filed 09/06/2005

Page 4 of 4