Sensormatic Security Corp. v. Sensormatic Electronics Corp.

District of Columbia

Sensormatic Security Corp. v. Sensormatic Electronics Corp.

97 F.R.D. 725, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17155

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedMay 5, 1983

DocketCiv. A. No. 83-952

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 97 F.R.D. 725 (Sensormatic Security Corp. v. Sensormatic Electronics Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sensormatic Security Corp. v. Sensormatic Electronics Corp., 97 F.R.D. 725, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17155 (D.D.C. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

CHARLES R. RICHEY, District Judge.

Upon consideration of plaintiff’s memorandum to show cause, and the entire record herein, it is, by the Court, this 5th day of May, 1983,

ORDERED, that defendant shall have until May 15, 1983 to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. Counsel are reminded that it is for the Court, not the parties, to grant extensions of time in cases pending before it.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

CHARLES R. RICHEY, District Judge.

Upon consideration of plaintiff’s memorandum to show cause, and the entire record herein, it is, by the Court, this 5th day of May, 1983,

ORDERED, that defendant shall have until May 15, 1983 to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. Counsel are reminded that it is for the Court, not the parties, to grant extensions of time in cases pending before it.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 F.R.D. 725, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17155, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sensormatic-security-corp-v-sensormatic-electronics-corp-dcd-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack