Blair v. Omaha, City of et al

Filing 275

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion for Enlargement of Time to Reply to the City Defendants' Reply Brief 271 is denied. The Clerk of the Court is directed to cancel the Final Pretrial Conference in this matter that is currently sch eduled for February 3, 2010, at 1:00 p.m. A separate progression order resetting the date of the Final Pretrial Conference may be entered after the court resolves the pending Motions for Summary Judgment. Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(KBJ)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA STEVEN R. BLAIR, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF OMAHA, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 8:07CV295

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's Motion for Enlargement of Time to Reply to the City Defendants' Reply Brief. (Filing No. 271.) For the reasons discussed below, the Motion is denied. Pursuant to NECivR 7.0.1(c) a moving party may file a reply brief and index of evidence after an opposing party files and serves an opposing brief. However, no party may file further briefs or evidence without the court's leave. NECivR 7.0.1(c). Here, the City Defendant's filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on August 5, 2009. (Filing No. 235.) After an extension of time, Plaintiff responded with a Brief in Opposition on December 15, 2009. (Filing No. 258.) After another extension of time, the City Defendant's filed a Reply Brief on January 4, 2010. (Filing No. 269.) Plaintiff now requests an extension of time to reply to the City Defendants' Reply Brief. (Filing No. 271.) However, Plaintiff has not asked the court for leave to file a reply nor has he shown cause to do so. Because the court previously warned Plaintiff that his numerous requests for extensions of time were unduly hindering the progression of this case (filing no. 249 at CM/ECF p. 11), and because Plaintiff has not requested leave to reply to the City Defendants' Reply Brief, his Motion for an Enlargement of Time is denied.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's Motion for Enlargement of Time to Reply to the City Defendants' Reply Brief (filing no. 271) is denied. 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to cancel the Final Pretrial Conference in this matter that is currently scheduled for February 3, 2010, at 1:00 p.m. A separate progression order resetting the date of the Final Pretrial Conference may be entered after the court resolves the pending Motions for Summary Judgment. DATED this 25th day of January, 2010. BY THE COURT:

s/ Joseph F. Bataillon Chief 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.