Chaten v. Vail et al

Filing 48

ORDER denying 47 Motion for Extension of Time to response to Defendants' answer. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L Strombom.(CMG; cc to Plaintiff)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER- 1 The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff and to counsel for Defendants. DATED this 6th day of December, 2010. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA ADRIAN LEWIS CHATEN, Plaintiff, v. RON VAN BOENING, DANIEL FITZPATRICK, MIKE HINES, MICHAESL A. FLEMMING, RYAN T. DENZER, and GEORGE GILBERT, Defendants. Before the Court is Plaintiff=s motion for an extension of time to respond to Defendants' Answer to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. ECF No. 47. Defendants= Answer contains no counterclaim and the court has not ordered a response to the Answer. Under these circumstances, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not allow or require the filing of a response to the Defendants= Answer to the Amended Complaint in this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7. Accordingly, there is no need for the extension of time sought by Plaintiff and therefore, his No. C09-5615 RJB/KLS ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' ANSWER

motion (ECF No. 47) shall be DENIED.

A

Karen L. Strombom United States Magistrate Judge