From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

BRADSHAW v. BOP DIRECTOR LAPPIN

United States District Court, D. Colorado
May 17, 2010
Civil Action No. 07-cv-02422-MSK-BNB (D. Colo. May. 17, 2010)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 07-cv-02422-MSK-BNB.

May 17, 2010


ORDER


This matter arises on the following motions:

1. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend [Doc. #129, filed 10/01/2009];

2. Defendants' Motion to Consolidate and for Extension of Time [Doc. #130, filed 10/02/2009]; and

3. The plaintiff's Supplemental Motion for Leave to Amend Related to Pending Doc. No. 129 [Doc. #195, filed 05/07/2010].

The plaintiffs seek leave to file an amended complaint [Doc. #129]. The defendants do not object to the proposed amended complaint [Doc. #130, ¶ 12]. However, the defendants request an extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to the amended complaint. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend [Doc. #129] is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to accept for filing the Amended Complaint [Doc. # 129-1].

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Consolidate and for Extension of Time [Doc. #130] is GRANTED. All defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint on or before August 16, 2010.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's Supplemental Motion for Leave to Amend Related to Pending Doc. No. 129 [Doc. #195] is DENIED AS MOOT.


Summaries of

BRADSHAW v. BOP DIRECTOR LAPPIN

United States District Court, D. Colorado
May 17, 2010
Civil Action No. 07-cv-02422-MSK-BNB (D. Colo. May. 17, 2010)
Case details for

BRADSHAW v. BOP DIRECTOR LAPPIN

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH BRADSHAW, TIMOTHY TUTAMORE, and JAMIE McMAHAN, Plaintiffs, v. BOP…

Court:United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: May 17, 2010

Citations

Civil Action No. 07-cv-02422-MSK-BNB (D. Colo. May. 17, 2010)