323 ordergrantingmotionsforextensionoftime kmart

Page 1

Case: 1:11-cv-00103-GHD-DAS Doc #: 323 Filed: 11/12/13 1 of 2 PageID #: 6208

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI

ABERDEEN DIVISION

KMART CORPORATION

v.

PLAINTIFF

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:II-CV-00I03-GHD-DAS

THE KROGER CO.; E & A SOUTHEAST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; FULTON IMPROVEMENTS, LLC; and KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY

DEFENDANTS

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME Presently before the Court are the following three motions filed by Plaintiff Kmart Corporation: a motion for extension oftime [315] to file a reply in support of its motion to exclude the testimony of James Monohan [263]; a motion for extension of time [316] to file a reply in support ofits motion to exclude the testimony of Robert Eley [257]; and a motion for extension of time [317] to file a reply in support of its motion for leave to file the amended report of John R. Krewson [271].

Plaintiff has informed the Court that Defendants have no objection to the

extensions. THEREFORE, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Kmart Corporation's motion for extension of time [315] to file a reply in support of its motion to exclude the testimony of James Monohan [263] is GRANTED, and Plaintiff must file that reply on or before Friday, November 15, 2013. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Kmart Corporation's motion for extension of

time [316] to file a reply in support of its motion to exclude the testimony of Robert Eley [257] is GRANTED, and Plaintiff must file that reply on or before Friday, November 15, 2013. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Kmart Corporation's motion for extension of


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.
323 ordergrantingmotionsforextensionoftime kmart by Milton Sandy - Issuu