Global Crossing Local Services, Inc. v. The Missouri Public Service Commission et al
Filing
84
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Southwestern Bell Telephone Company's Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other parties to this action may file supplemental memorandum by December 16, 2011. (Response to Court due by 12/16/2011). Signed by Magistrate Judge Nannette A Baker on 12/9/11. (TRC)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
GLOBAL CROSSING LOCAL
SERVICES, INC.
Plaintiff,
vs.
THE MISSOURI PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION et al,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 4:11-CV-00315-NAB
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Presently before the Court is motion filed by Defendant Southwestern Bell Telephone
Company that seeks leave to file supplemental memorandum. The Court grants the motion.
On December 5, 2011, Defendants Robert M. Clayton, III, Jeff Davis, Kevin Gunn, Terry
M. Jarrett, Robert S. Kenney and the Missouri Public Service Commission filed a notice that the
Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) issued a decision on November 18, 2011 that is
relevant to the issues presented in the underlying action. Defendant Southwestern Bell
Telephone Company seeks leave to file supplemental memorandum in light of the FCC’s
decision. The Court grants the motion for leave to file supplemental memorandum and further
orders that all parties to this action may file supplemental memorandum by December 16, 2011.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Southwestern Bell Telephone Company’s
Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other parties to this action may file supplemental
memorandum by December 16, 2011.
Dated this 9th day of December, 2011
/s/ Nannette A. Baker
NANNETTE A. BAKER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?