by the Supreme Court, should file an answer to the complaint within 10 days of receiving notice of the Supreme Court’s decision. 11 . Based upon the facts outlined in our decision in Pritt v. Republican National Committee, 210 W.Va. 446, 557 S.E.2d 853 (2001), it is clear that the defendants’ previous Rule 12(b) motion was not converted into a summary judgment motion. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment specifically under Rule 56. 12 . Unlike Rule 12(a), which expressly tolls the period for filing an answer when a Rule 12(b) motion is filed, ’’[ujnder Rule 56 there is no express extension of time for filing responsive pleadings until the disposition of the motion for summary judgment.” Foe, 15 F.R.D. at 87. See Ricke v. Armco, Inc., 158 F.R.D. 149, 150 (D.Minn.1994) (<HOLDING>). Some federal courts have taken the position
holding that district court should not have granted summary judgment solely on basis that motion for summary judgment was not opposed holding that an unauthorized motion for rehearing does not toll defendants time for filing a notice of appeal holding that a preanswer motion for summary judgment does not suspend the time for filing an answer holding that claims raised for the first time in an opposition to a motion for summary judgment are not properly before a court holding that filing of an answer up to the time of signing of judgment renders the judgment an absolute nullity