The Raymond Lee Organization, Inc
Volume 90 · 90 F.T.C. 299
Cite this decision
The Raymond Lee Organization, Inc, 90 F.T.C. 299 (1977). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v090-0034
Report an error in this record (decision id v090-0034)
Cited by 0 later FTC decisions
Cites
Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)
IN THE MATTER OF THE RAYMOND LEE ORGANIZATION, INC., ET AL. Docket 9045. Interlocutory Order. Oct. , 1977 Denial of respondents' request for extension of time for fiing answer to motion for leave to fie amicus curiae brief.
ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT S REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING AN ANSWER attorney By motion fied October 4, 1977, Mr. Norman Axe, representing various persons and non-profit entities, requests that the Commission grant leave to file a brief of an amicus curiae in the above-captioned matter. On September 30, 1977, pursuant to Commission Rules 3.52(h) and 4.4(b), Mr. Axe, sending by mail, gave notice to the interested parties.
By letter received October 18 1977, Mr. Malcolm 1. Lewin, attorney representing The Raymond Lee Organization, Inc. and Raymond Lee requests the Commission to grant an extension of time for filing an answer to the above motion for leave to file a brief of an amicus curiae.
Assuming arguendo that under Commission Rule 3.52(h) respondent has a right to fie an answer to a motion requesting leave to file a brief of an amicus curiae, the specified time within which the answer should have been forthcoming has expired. ' Moreover, the Commission finds nothing in respondent' s letter of October 18, 1977 that would justify the granting of such an extension of time. Accordingly, It is ordered, That said motion be, and it hereby is, denied. , Pursuant to Rule 4.4(c)(1),service was complete on O tober 7, 1977, beause Mr. Malcolm I. Lewin has indi ate to the Secretary s Offce that the Post Offce delivered Mr. Norman Axe s motion On that day- Commission Rule 3.22( ) requires that within 10 days after service of any written motion, the opposinr; party shall answer- In measuring this speifi.. period, intervening Saturdays, Sundays and nlltiona! holidays areounted beause, as Rule 3(a) provides, th.. period within whi h one must,lOswer exceeds seven days- Therefore, even if measured from this dllte, thl!specified period expired on Wednesday, October 19, 1977 Complaint 90 F.