From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hanratty v. Zynex, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Colorado
May 18, 2009
Civil Action No. 1:09-cv-00816-MSK-MJW (D. Colo. May. 18, 2009)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:09-cv-00816-MSK-MJW.

May 18, 2009


ORDER (Docket No. 14)


THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Joint Motion of plaintiff Robert Hanratty ("Plaintiff") and defendants Zynex, Inc., Thomas Sandgaard, and Fritz Allison ("Defendants"), to vacate the Rule 6(b) scheduling conference currently set for June 24, 2009, the related ceadlines, and exterd the time for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's complaint. Having reviewed the Joint Motion and finding good cause therein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERDED as follows:

1. The parties' Joint Motion is GRANTED;

2. The Rule 16(b) scheduling conference currently set for June 24, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. and the related deadlines are vacated; and

3. Defendants are granted an extension of time to 45 days after the filing and service of a consolidated complaint to answer or otherwise respond.


Summaries of

Hanratty v. Zynex, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Colorado
May 18, 2009
Civil Action No. 1:09-cv-00816-MSK-MJW (D. Colo. May. 18, 2009)
Case details for

Hanratty v. Zynex, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT HANRATTY, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly…

Court:United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: May 18, 2009

Citations

Civil Action No. 1:09-cv-00816-MSK-MJW (D. Colo. May. 18, 2009)