Miller v. Kastelic et al

Filing 154

MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part 140 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Previously Filed Response to Motion for Summary Judgment and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Amended Response and C ross-Motion for Summary Judgment, which is liberally construed as a motion to file a surreply. Plaintiff shall file a surreply on or before 1/21/2014. To the extent that the surreply contains new arguments and/or evidence, the Court will entertain a motion from the Defendants requesting leave to respond. By Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 1/7/2013. (mehcd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 12-cv-02677-CMA-MEH
LARRY C. MILLER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAPTAIN KASTELIC,
DANIEL REIMER, and
LT. RIDGWELL,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on January 7, 2014.
The Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Previously Filed Response to Motion for Summary Judgment
and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Amended
Response and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [filed January 2, 2014; docket #140] is granted
in part and denied in part. Plaintiff states that his previously submitted response to Defendants’
Motion for Summary Judgment and his Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment “lack both in their
statements . . . and contain no sworn affidavits[.]”
The Court liberally construes Plaintiff’s request as a motion to file a surreply. The Court will
not strike Plaintiff’s response, but will permit Plaintiff an opportunity to file a surreply, in which he
may attach affidavits and clarify any statements made in his response. Plaintiff shall file the surreply
on or before January 21, 2014. To the extent that the surreply contains new arguments and/or
evidence, the Court will entertain a motion from the Defendants requesting leave to respond.