Dayton v. Purdue Pharma LP et al

Filing 20

ORDER - The #17 Unopposed Motion of Dr. Russell Portenoy to Stay the Date by Which to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint and For an Extension of Time Pending Final Determination of Removal is GRANTED; it is further ORDERED that the date by which Dr. Russell Portenoy shall answer, move, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint is hereby stayed pending a final determination of removal; and it is further ORDERED that Dr. Russell Portenoy shall have seventy-five (75) days after the final determination of removal by which to answer, move, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 8-28-2017. (de)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
CITY OF DAYTON,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Plaintiff,
vs.
PURDUE PHARMA L.P., et al.,
Defendants.

No. 3:17-cv-229
Judge Thomas M. Rose
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

ORDER
Upon consideration it is hereby
ORDERED that the Unopposed Motion of Dr. Russell Portenoy to Stay the Date by
Which to Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint and For an Extension of Time Pending Final
Determination of Removal is GRANTED; it is further
ORDERED that the date by which Dr. Russell Portenoy shall answer, move, or
otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint is hereby stayed pending a final determination of
removal; and it is further
ORDERED that Dr. Russell Portenoy shall have seventy-five (75) days after the final
determination of removal by which to answer, move, or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s
Complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED
ENTERED this 28th day of August 2017

*S/THOMAS M. ROSE
Thomas M. Rose
UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

9493020