HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-cv-2306-RM-KLM - Perry v. State of Colorado, et al - 035 - Motion for Extension to file Reply re Mot DismissIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 1:21-CV-02306-RM-KLM
ROBERT LAWRENCE PERRY,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE STATE OF COLORADO,
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS,
CSU BOARD OF GOVERNORS FOR CSU,
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY and
STEVEN VASCONSELLOS, Judicial Administrator;
Defendants.
DEFENDANT CITY OF FORT COLLINS’ MOTION FOR ONE-WEEK EXTENSION
OF TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED COMPLAINT [ECF 30]
Defendant City of Fort Collins (“Defendant”), via counsel, Mark S. Ratner, Esq., and
Katherine N. Hoffman, Esq., of Hall & Evans, L.L.C., and under Fed.R.Civ.P. 6 and related
authorities, hereby submits this Motion for One-Week Extension of Time to File Reply in Support
of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint [ECF 30], and respectfully
seeks a one-week extension of time to do so until and including Monday, November 15, 2021,
stating in support as follows:
D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1: Undersigned counsel attempted to confer with pro se Plaintiff via
email on Friday, October 29, 2021 at 9:00 A.M. Undersigned counsel attempted to confer with pro
se Plaintiff again via email on Tuesday, November 2, 2021 at 6:22 A.M. Counsel has not received
a response from Plaintiff regarding counsel’s attempts to confer.
Case 1:21-cv-02306-RM-KLM Document 35 Filed 11/02/21 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 4
2
I. DISCUSSION
1. The current deadline for Defendant to file a Reply in Support of Defendant’s Motion
to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is November 8, 2021. [See generally Docket].
2. Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b) provides if a party moves for an extension of time to complete an act
before the expiration of the period to complete that act, the court possesses the discretion to grant
the sought-after extension of time.
3. As reason therefore, undersigned counsel requires additional time to review, analyze,
and address the arguments raised in Plaintiff’s Response. [ECF 33]. Significantly, counsel is
confronted with a lengthy 20-page Response, which includes several pages of single-spaced text.
Plaintiff’s Response appears to assert additional factual allegations for the first time, and counsel
requires additional time to review these new allegations. [Id.]. In addition, Plaintiff addresses
arguments in his Response which Defendant did not raise in its Motion to Dismiss (i.e. sovereign
immunity), which require review, analysis, and an opportunity to respond. [Id. at 3].
4. Additionally, undersigned counsel represents that she will be out of state on a
previously scheduled vacation from November 4, 2021 to November 7, 2021. As such, additional
time is needed to prepare a Reply.
5. Thus, Defendant requests a brief one-week extension to file a Reply in Support of
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, until and including Monday,
November 15, 2021.
6. This is Defendant’s first request for an extension of time respecting the deadline to
prepare and file its Reply in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended
Complaint.
Case 1:21-cv-02306-RM-KLM Document 35 Filed 11/02/21 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 4
3
7. This Motion is made in good faith and not for purposes of delay.
8. None of the Parties nor the Court will be prejudiced by granting this relief.
9. Defendant files this Motion in advance of the presumptive deadline pursuant to
Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b)(1)(A), which authorizes the Court to grant a motion for extension of time made
before the expiration of the original period of time.
10. Hence, good cause exists for the Court to grant the requested relief.
11. Finally, pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 6.1(c), undersigned counsel certifies this
Motion is being served herewith on authorized representatives of Defendant.
II. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, for these reasons, Defendant City of Fort Collins respectfully seeks from the
Court an Order: granting Defendant a one-week extension of time until and including Monday,
November 15, 2021, to file and serve its Reply in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint; and entering all other and future relief which the Court deems just
and appropriate.
Respectfully submitted this 2nd day of November 2021.
s/Katherine N. Hoffman
Katherine N. Hoffman, Esq.
Mark S. Ratner, Esq.
Hall & Evans, L.L.C.
1001 17th Street, Suite 300
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: 303-628-3300
Fax: 303-628-3368
Ratnerm@hallevans.com
Hoffmank@hallevans.com
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
Case 1:21-cv-02306-RM-KLM Document 35 Filed 11/02/21 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 4
4
`
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (CM/ECF)
I hereby certify that on the 2nd day of November 2021, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing was filed with the Court via CM/ECF and served on the below-listed party by email:
Robert Lawrence Perry
fort_scout@yahoo.com
Pro se Plaintiff
s/Sarah Stefanick, Legal Assistant to
Mark S. Ratner, Esq.
Katherine N. Hoffman, Esq.
Hall & Evans, L.L.C.
1001 17th Street, Suite 300
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: 303-628-3300
Fax: 303-628-3368
Ratnerm@hallevans.com
Hoffmank@hallevans.com
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
Case 1:21-cv-02306-RM-KLM Document 35 Filed 11/02/21 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 4