Achs et al v. 3M Company et al

Filing 9

ORDER - This matter comes before the Court upon the Unopposed Motion of Defendants Tyco Fire Products LP and Chemguard, Inc. for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint With Jury Demand (Motion). (Doc. # 6 ). For the reasons set forth in the Motion, the Motion (Doc. # 6 ) is GRANTED. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that all Defendants shall have 28 days from the date of entry of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation's decision on whether transfer to the Multidistrict Litigation to respond to Plaintiffs Complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter B. Silvain, Jr on 3/27/2024. (srb)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON SHAWN ACHS, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. 3M COMPANY, et al., Defendants. : : : : : : : : : : Case No. 3:24-cv-93 District Judge Thomas M. Rose Magistrate Judge Peter B. Silvain, Jr. ORDER This matter comes before the Court upon the Unopposed Motion of Defendants Tyco Fire Products LP and Chemguard, Inc. for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiffs’ Complaint With Jury Demand (“Motion”). (Doc. #6). For the reasons set forth in the Motion, the Motion (Doc. #6) is GRANTED. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that all Defendants shall have 28 days from the date of entry of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation’s decision on whether transfer to the Multidistrict Litigation to respond to Plaintiffs’ Complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. March 27, 2024 s/Peter B. Silvain, Jr. Peter B. Silvain, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge

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?