Najawicz v. A T & T Services, Inc

Filing 11

ORDER granting 9 Motion for More Definite Statement; denying 10 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Signed by District Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff. (MVer)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ANTHONY W. NAJAWICZ Plaintiff, Case No. 11-15479 Hon. Lawrence P. Zatkoff v. AT&T SERVICES, INC., Defendant. / ORDER On February 27, 2012, Defendant filed a Motion for a More Definite Statement of Plaintiff’s Claims [dkt 9]. On March 21, 2012, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a Motion for Extension of Time to respond to Defendant’s Motion [dkt 10]. Because Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time was filed after the deadline by which he was to respond to Defendant’s Motion, the Court shall deny Plaintiff’s Motion, and will consider Defendant’s Motion for a More Definite Statement unopposed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1) (“the court may, for good cause, extend the time with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires”) (emphasis added). Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for an extension of time [dkt 10] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for a More Definite Statement [dkt 9] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall submit a more definite statement of his 1 claims on or before 5 p.m. on Tuesday, April 24, 2012. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: April 11, 2012 s/Lawrence P. Zatkoff LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?