Lazarov v. Kimmel et al

Filing 46

MINUTE ORDER denying 42 plaintiffs Request for Leave to Counterclaim to Defendants Reply in Support of Their Combined Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(B)(6) ; denying 44 Plaintiff's Motion for Order to Dismiss Defendants Reply in Support of Their Combined Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(B)(6), which this court has construed as a motion to strike defendants reply, is denied. by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 9/30/2010.(erv, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 10-cv-01238-CMA-MJW MALINA V. LAZAROV, Plaintiff, v. JAMES KIMMEL, SUZANNE STAIERT, JOHN JONES, and TRENT COOPER, Defendant(s). MINUTE ORDER Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe It is hereby ORDERED that the plaintiff's Request for Leave to Counterclaim to Defendants' Reply in Support of Their Combined Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(B)(6) (Docket No. 42) is denied. This court has already denied the plaintiff's Motion for Permission to Reply to Defendants' Reply in Support of Their Combined Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R. Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 38), as supplemented (Docket No. 40). (See Docket No. 41, Minute Order of September 14, 2010). It is further ORDERED that the plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Defendants' Reply in Support of Their Combined Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(B)(6) (Docket No. 44), which this court has construed as a motion to strike defendants' reply, is denied, finding no good cause shown. Date: September 30, 2010