DOE v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS, 4:10-CV-2158-JAR. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. Missouri
Number: infdco20120301d21
Visitors: 4
Filed: Feb. 29, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 29, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOHN A. ROSS, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Strike/Summarily Deny Defendants' Kuhmo Tire Company/Daubert Motion as Untimely, or in the alternative, Clarify Scheduling Order for Response [ECF No. 144] and Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time [ECF No. 154]. After consideration, the Court will deny Plaintiff's Motion to Strike and grant Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JOHN A. ROSS, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Strike/Summarily Deny Defendants' Kuhmo Tire Company/Daubert Motion as Untimely, or in the alternative, Clarify Scheduling Order for Response [ECF No. 144] and Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time [ECF No. 154]. After consideration, the Court will deny Plaintiff's Motion to Strike and grant Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff'..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JOHN A. ROSS, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Strike/Summarily Deny Defendants' Kuhmo Tire Company/Daubert Motion as Untimely, or in the alternative, Clarify Scheduling Order for Response [ECF No. 144] and Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time [ECF No. 154]. After consideration, the Court will deny Plaintiff's Motion to Strike and grant Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Strike/Summarily Deny Defendants' Kuhmo Tire Company/Daubert Motion as Untimely, or in the alternative, Clarify Scheduling Order for Response [ECF No. 144] is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time [ECF No. 154] is GRANTED.
Source: Leagle
