Dowling v. Mountain States Line Constructors Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee

Filing 68

MINUTE ORDER denying 48 Plaintiff's Motion to Clarify Due Date Postponement of the Response to the Motion to Dismiss. The court will rule on the timeliness of Plaintiff's proposed response to Defendants Motion to Dismiss if and when Plaintiff files a response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, assuming that the issue is raised. By Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 5/29/12.(mjgsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
Civil Action No. 11–cv–02697–REB–KMT

THERESA L. DOWLING,
Plaintiff,
v.
MOUNTAIN STATES LINE CONSTRUCTORS JOINT APPRENTICESHIP AND TRAINING
COMMITTEE,
Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER
ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KATHLEEN M. TAFOYA
Plaintiff’s Motion to Clarify Due Date Postponement of the Response to the Motion to Dismiss”
(Doc. No. 48, filed May 17, 2012) is DENIED. Plaintiff seeks to clarify whether the filing of her
“Opposed Motion to Strike Motion to Dismiss” (Doc. No. 58-1) postpones the deadline by which
she may file a response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 12). The court finds that
“clarifying” that deadline would be tantamount to an impermissible “advisory opinion.” The
court will rule on the timeliness of Plaintiff’s proposed response to Defendant’s Motion to
Dismiss if and when Plaintiff files a response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, assuming that
the issue is raised.
Dated: May 29, 2012