IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

 ) Case No. 1:20-cv-01853 

BCBSM, INC., et al., ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) Honorable Virginia M. Kendall 

 ) Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan 

 v. ) 

 ) 

WALGREEN CO., et al., ) Consolidated with: 

) No. 1:20-cv-01929 

 Defendants. ) No. 1:20-cv-03332 

 ) No. 1:20-cv-04738 

 ) No. 1:20-cv-04940 

SECOND UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR RESPONDING 

TO DEFENDANT/COUNTER-PLAINTIFF WALGREEN CO.’S COUNTERCLAIM 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b), and Local Rules 5.3 and 5.4, Plaintiffs respectfully move 

the Court for entry of an order permitting Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants an additional seven days 

in which to answer or otherwise respond to Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Walgreen Co.’s Verified 

Counterclaim (Doc. No. 149) (“Counterclaim”). In support of this Motion, Plaintiffs/CounterDefendants state: 

1. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Walgreen Co. filed its Counterclaim in this case on 

July 26, 2021. Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Counterclaim, which 

was denied on February 9, 2022. As a result, Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants’ deadline to 

otherwise respond to the Counterclaim was originally February 23, 2022. 

2. This is Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants’ Second Motion for an Extension of Time 

for Responding to the Counterclaim. In the first, Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants pointed out that 

the Counterclaim raised complex issues regarding, inter alia, attorney-client communications and 

representation by Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants’ lead counsel in this litigation. As pointed out 

Case: 1:20-cv-01853 Document #: 231 Filed: 03/15/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:5726
 2 

in the First Motion for an Extension of Time, Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants required additional 

time to consider whether they needed to retain independent counsel to aid in their defense of the 

Counterclaim and to retain such counsel. 

3. Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants have decided to retain independent counsel, the 

undersigned, to aid in their defense in the Counterclaim. This counsel is now gathering facts and 

assessing the background of the case and needs additional time to prepare the response to the 

Counterclaim. 

4. Counsel for the parties have conferred by email concerning the substance of this 

Motion. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Walgreen Co. does not oppose the relief sought through 

this Motion. 

5. Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Walgreen Co. will face no prejudice in the event that 

Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants’ requested extension is granted. 

6. In compliance with the Court’s Second Amended General Order 21-0027 In Re: 

Suspension of Local Rules 5.2(F) and 5.3(B) and Continued Authorization for Email Filings by 

Pro Se Litigations (Jan. 12, 2022), Plaintiffs will not notice this motion for in-person presentment 

at this time and will await notification from the presiding judge as to the need, if any, for a hearing 

by electronic means or in-court proceeding. 

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth herein, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the 

Court enter an Order granting Plaintiffs until March 23, 2022, to file their response to Defendant 

Walgreen Co.’s Counterclaim. 

 

Case: 1:20-cv-01853 Document #: 231 Filed: 03/15/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:5727
 3 

DATED: March 15, 2022 Respectfully Submitted, 

 

Of Counsel: 

Peter R. Jarvis 

Holland & Knight LLP 

601 SW Second Avenue 

Suite 1800 

Portland, OR 97204 

(503) 243-5877 

peter.jarvis@hklaw.com

pro hac vice motion pending 

Timothy J. Conner 

Holland & Knight LLP 

50 N Laura Street 

Suite 3900 

Jacksonville, FL 32202 

(904) 798-7362 

timothy.conner@hklaw.com 

By: /s/ Trisha M. Rich 

Trisha M. Rich (No. 6288544) 

Holland & Knight LLP 

150 N Riverside Plaza 

Suite 2700 

Chicago, IL 60606 

(312) 263.3600 

trisha.rich@hklaw.com 

Counsel for Plaintiffs 

Case: 1:20-cv-01853 Document #: 231 Filed: 03/15/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:5728