CARRINGTON et al v. DUKE UNIVERSITY et al

Filing 142

REPLY to Response to 140 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint; filed by KYLE DOWD, PATRICIA DOWD, DANIEL FLANNERY, RICHARD GIBBS FOGARTY, ZACHARY GREER, IRENE GREER, ERIK S. HENKELMAN, STEVEN W. HENKELMAN, JOHN E. JENNISON, BEN KOESTERER, EDWARD CARRINGTON, MARK KOESTERER, JOYCE KOESTERER, FRED KROM, PETER J. LAMADE, ADAM LANGLEY, CHRISTOPHER LOFTUS, DANIEL LOFTUS, BARBARA LOFTUS, ANTHONY MCDEVITT, GLENN NICK, CASEY J. CARROLL, NICHOLAS O'HARA, LYNNDA O'HARA, DANIEL OPPEDISANO, SAM PAYTON, JOHN BRADLEY ROSS, KENNETH SAUER, III, STEVE SCHOEFFEL, ROBERT SCHROEDER, DEVON SHERWOOD, DANIEL THEODORIDIS, MICHAEL P. CATALINO, BRET THOMPSON, CHRISTOPHER TKAC, TRACY TKAC, JOHN WALSH, JR, MICHAEL WARD, ROBERT H. WELLINGTON, IV, WILLIAM WOLCOTT, MICHAEL YOUNG, GALE CATALINO, THOMAS V. CLUTE, KEVIN COLEMAN, JOSHUA R. COVELESKI, EDWARD J. CROTTY, EDWARD S. DOUGLAS. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order) (COOPER, CHARLES) Modified on 9/29/2009 to remove duplicate text (Lee, Lisa).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA No. 1:08-cv-119 ________________________________________________ ) ) EDWARD CARRINGTON et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) DUKE UNIVERSITY et al., ) ) Defendants. ________________________________________________ ) ORDER Upon consideration of Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint ("the Motion") (Docket Entry 140), the City of Durham's Response, and the Plaintiffs' Reply, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED That Plaintiffs' proposed Amended Complaint, attached to the Motion as Exhibit 1, is deemed filed as of this date; And that the City of Durham may file and serve within ___ days of this order a supplemental motion to dismiss and supporting memorandum of no more than 10 pages and limited to issues raised by the amendments to the Complaint, that Plaintiffs may file and serve an opposition to the City of Durham's

CIVIL COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

supplemental motion to dismiss of no more than 10 pages, and that the City of Durham may file and serve a reply to Plaintiffs' opposition of no more than five pages. It is so ORDERED this ______ day of _______________, 200__.

_____________________________________ James A. Beaty, Jr. Chief Judge United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina