BARTRAM LLC v. C B CONTRACTORS LLC

Filing 115

ORDER GRANTING 114 MOTION for Leave to File Reply to Defendants' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by BARTRAM LLC. Plaintiff shall file a reply not to exeed ten pages by 10/8/2010. Defendants, C.B. CONTRACTORS AND CAMBRIDGE BUILDERS shall file a sur-reply not to exceed ten pages by 10/15/2010. (Miscellaneous (Sur-reply) Deadline - by 10/15/2010., Replies due by 10/8/2010.). Signed by CHIEF JUDGE STEPHAN P MICKLE on 9/29/2010. (jws)

Download PDF
-GRJ BARTRAM LLC v. C B CONTRACTORS LLC Doc. 115 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION THE BARTRAM, LLC, Plaintiff, v. C.B. CONTRACTORS, LLC and CAMBRIDGE BUILDERS & CONTRACTORS, LLC, Defendants. _______________________________/ C.B. CONTRACTORS, LLC, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff, v. DUFFIELD ALUMINUM d/b/a DHI ROOFING, et al., Third-Party Defendants. ________________________________/ ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a reply. Doc. 114. Plaintiff's motion does not contain a certificate that it conferred with the opposing side as required under Northern District of Florida Local Rule 7.1(B). Nevertheless, to expedite consideration of the motions and provide all CASE NO.: 1:09-cv254-SPM/GRJ Dockets.Justia.com Page 2 of 2 parties with a fair opportunity to fully present the issues, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 1. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a reply (doc. 114) is granted. Plaintiff shall have up to and including October 8, 2010, to file a reply not to exceed ten pages. 2. Defendants C.B. Contractors and Cambridge Builders shall have up to and including October 15, 2010, to file a sur-reply not to exceed ten pages. DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of September, 2010. s/ Stephan P. Mickle Stephan P. Mickle Chief United States District Judge CASE NO.: 1:09-cv254-SPM/GRJ

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?