J.P. v. CONNELL, 2:15-cv-103-FtM-38CM. (2015)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20150309a18
Visitors: 36
Filed: Mar. 06, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 06, 2015
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion to Stay or in the Alternative to Extend the Time to Respond to Defendants' Motion to Consolidate ( Doc. #18 ) filed on March 5, 2015. Without opposition, the plaintiffs seek a stay or alternatively an extended deadline to respond to the pending Motion to Consolidate. ( See Doc. #10 ). The plaintiffs reason that they have a pending Motion to Remand before the Court, that is
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion to Stay or in the Alternative to Extend the Time to Respond to Defendants' Motion to Consolidate ( Doc. #18 ) filed on March 5, 2015. Without opposition, the plaintiffs seek a stay or alternatively an extended deadline to respond to the pending Motion to Consolidate. ( See Doc. #10 ). The plaintiffs reason that they have a pending Motion to Remand before the Court, that is c..
More
ORDER1
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion to Stay or in the Alternative to Extend the Time to Respond to Defendants' Motion to Consolidate (Doc. #18) filed on March 5, 2015. Without opposition, the plaintiffs seek a stay or alternatively an extended deadline to respond to the pending Motion to Consolidate. (See Doc. #10). The plaintiffs reason that they have a pending Motion to Remand before the Court, that is currently not ripe, and they prefer to have the Motion to Remand resolved before responding to the Motion to Consolidate. (See Doc. #13). In essence, the plaintiffs wish to conserve their time and resources. Upon consideration, the Court will not stay this case but will extend the deadline to respond to Defendants' Motion to Consolidate. The plaintiffs, however, are warned they must respond to the pending Motion to Consolidate by the Court's new deadline regardless of the status of the pending Motion to Remand.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion to Stay or in the Alternative to Extend the Time to Respond to Defendants' Motion to Consolidate (Doc. #18) is GRANTED. The new deadline to respond to the Motion to Consolidate, (Doc. #10), is March 27, 2015.
DONE and ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other Web sites, this court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
Source: Leagle
