STOKES v. WHITE, 4:16CV3027. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20161109f50
Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 08, 2016
Latest Update: Nov. 08, 2016
Summary: ORDER RICHARD G. KOPF , Senior District Judge . Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to Defendant's Answer (Filing No. 17 ). Plaintiff's motion shall be denied for the reason that the defendant has been served with process, the defendant filed an answer on October 14, 2016 (Filing No. 14 ), and a progression order that will govern how this case will proceed must now be issued. NECivR 16.1 (c)(2) (approximately 30 days after last defendant answers in pro se cas
Summary: ORDER RICHARD G. KOPF , Senior District Judge . Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to Defendant's Answer (Filing No. 17 ). Plaintiff's motion shall be denied for the reason that the defendant has been served with process, the defendant filed an answer on October 14, 2016 (Filing No. 14 ), and a progression order that will govern how this case will proceed must now be issued. NECivR 16.1 (c)(2) (approximately 30 days after last defendant answers in pro se case..
More
ORDER
RICHARD G. KOPF, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to Defendant's Answer (Filing No. 17). Plaintiff's motion shall be denied for the reason that the defendant has been served with process, the defendant filed an answer on October 14, 2016 (Filing No. 14), and a progression order that will govern how this case will proceed must now be issued. NECivR 16.1(c)(2) (approximately 30 days after last defendant answers in pro se case, court will issue progression order addressing discovery and other issues).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply to Defendant's Answer (Filing No. 17) is denied; and
2. A progression order governing how this case will proceed shall now be issued.
Source: Leagle
