Dobson Brothers Construction v. Ratliff et al

Filing 134

ORDER - Plaintiff's unopposed motion (filing 133 ) for extension of time to respond to defendant American Contractors Indemnity Company's motion (filing 131 ) for summary judgment is granted. Plaintiff shall file its opposing brief and e vidence to defendant American Contractors Indemnity Company's motion (filing 131 ) for summary judgment on or before October 11, 2011. Pursuant to NECivR 7.0.1(c), Defendant American Contractors Indemnity Company may file a reply brief and inde x of evidence within seven days after Plaintiff files and serves its opposing brief and evidence. This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Zwart to determine whether the pretrial conference and the trial in this matter should be continued. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (GJG)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
DOBSON BROTHERS
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a
Nebraska corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
RATLIFF, INC., an Oklahoma
corporation, and AMERICAN
CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY
COMPANY, a California
corporation,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

4:08CV3103

ORDER

Pursuant to Plaintiff’s unopposed motion (filing 133) for extension of time to
respond to defendant American Contractors Indemnity Company’s motion (filing 131)
for summary judgment,
IT IS ORDERED:
1.

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion (filing 133) for extension of time to respond

to defendant American Contractors Indemnity Company’s motion (filing 131) for
summary judgment is granted;
2.

Plaintiff shall file its opposing brief and evidence to defendant American

Contractors Indemnity Company’s motion (filing 131) for summary judgment on or
before October 11, 2011;

3.

Pursuant to NECivR 7.0.1(c), Defendant American Contractors

Indemnity Company may file a reply brief and index of evidence within seven days
after Plaintiff files and serves its opposing brief and evidence; and
4.

This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Zwart to determine whether

the pretrial conference and the trial in this matter should be continued.
DATED this 19 th day of September, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
s/Richard G. Kopf
United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The
U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend,
approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on
their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties
or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or
functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or
directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
2