Amaya v. Bregman, 1:14-CV-00599-WJ-SMV. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. New Mexico
Number: infdco20160316c06
Visitors: 17
Filed: Mar. 15, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 15, 2016
Summary: ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR FURTHER EXTENSION OF TIME TO ADDRESS DEFENDANT JAMIE ESTRADA'S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS, SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION PROPOUNDED BY PLAINTIFFS STEPHAN M. VIDMAR , Magistrate Judge . THIS MATTER having come before the Court on the Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time t
Summary: ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR FURTHER EXTENSION OF TIME TO ADDRESS DEFENDANT JAMIE ESTRADA'S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS, SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION PROPOUNDED BY PLAINTIFFS STEPHAN M. VIDMAR , Magistrate Judge . THIS MATTER having come before the Court on the Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to..
More
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR FURTHER EXTENSION OF TIME TO ADDRESS DEFENDANT JAMIE ESTRADA'S OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES, FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS, SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION PROPOUNDED BY PLAINTIFFS
STEPHAN M. VIDMAR, Magistrate Judge.
THIS MATTER having come before the Court on the Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to and until April 15, 2016 in which to proceed under D.N.M.LR-Civ. 26.6 and 37.1 to address Defendant Jamie Estrada's responses and objections to Plaintiffs' First Set of Interrogatories, First Set of Requests for Production, First Set of Requests for Admissions, Second Set of Interrogatories and Second Set of Requests for Production propounded by Plaintiffs to Defendant Estrada, and the Court having reviewed the motion and otherwise being advised in the premises, finds that the Motion is well taken and should be granted.
IT IS NOW, THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiffs shall have to and until April 15, 2016 in which to proceed under D.N.M.LR-Civ. 26.6 and 37.1 to address Defendant Estrada's objections and responses to Plaintiffs' First Set of Interrogatories, First Set of Requests for Production, and First Set of Requests for Admissions propounded by Plaintiffs to Defendant Jamie Estrada and Plaintiffs' Second Set of Interrogatories and Second Set of Requests for Production propounded by Plaintiffs to Defendant Jamie Estrada.
Source: Leagle