Medlock v. Taco Bell Corp., et al.

Filing 430

Order re Defendants' Ex Parte Application to continue hearing date on Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 06/25/2014. (Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summa ry Judgment filed by 6/30/2014; Plaintiffs' Reply to Defendants' Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by 7/11/2014; Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing set for 8/13/2014 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9 (SAB) before Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone; Defendant's Motion to Compel Hearing set for 8/13/2014 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9 (SAB) before Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone) (Figueroa, O)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SANDRIKA MEDLOCK, et al.,

14

ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE
APPLICATION TO CONTINUE HEARING
DATE ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs,

12
13

Case No. 1:07-cv-01314-SAB

v.
TACO BELL CORP., et al.,

ECF NO. 426
15

Defendants.

16
17

On June 24, 2014, Defendants Taco Bell Corp. and Taco Bell of America, Inc.

18 (“Defendants”) filed an ex parte application to continue the hearing date for Plaintiffs’ motion
19 for summary judgment. (ECF No. 426.) The Court conducted a telephonic hearing on the
20 request at 4:30 p.m. on June 25, 2014.
21

Defendants contend that a continuance is appropriate pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

22 Procedure 56(d) to complete necessary discovery in support of its opposition. Rather than rule
23 upon this issue separately, the Court will construe Defendants’ arguments as an opposition to
24 Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. Defendants indicated that other grounds exist to deny
25 the motion for summary judgment, but no opposition setting forth these arguments has been
26 filed. The Court advises Defendants that, in the future, all arguments in opposition to a motion
27 must filed by the appropriate deadline. Defendants may not file an ex parte application to
28 continue the hearing date and expect the Court to grant them additional time to file additional

1

1 arguments in opposition in the event that their request for a continuance is denied. In this
2 instance, the Court will grant Defendants a brief period of time to file a comprehensive
3 opposition that covers any and all arguments in opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for summary
4 judgment.
5

Defendants also indicated that they are unavailable for a hearing on the motion for

6 summary judgment on July 9, 2014. In the future, counsel should inform the Court of any
7 availability issues earlier, rather than wait until two weeks before the scheduled hearing date to
8 request a change of date. In this instance, the Court will move the hearing date on the motion for
9 summary judgment from July 9, 2014 to August 13, 2014 to accommodate Defendants’
10 unavailability.
11

Finally, at the hearing, the parties agreed to consolidate the hearing dates on all pending

12 motions in this matter to be heard on August 13, 2014. Accordingly, the Court will reschedule
13 the hearing on the June 20, 2014 motion to compel from July 16, 2014 to August 13, 2014.
14

Based upon the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

15

1.

The hearing on Plaintiffs’ July 11, 2014 motion for summary judgment is

16

CONTINUED from July 9, 2014 to August 13, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 9

17

(SAB) before United States Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone;

18

2.

on or before June 30, 2014;

19
20

3.

Plaintiffs’ reply to Defendants’ opposition to the motion for summary judgment
shall be filed on or before July 11, 2014; and

21
22

Defendants’ opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment shall be filed

4.

The hearing on Defendants’ motion to compel is CONTINUED from July 16,
2014 to August 13, 2014.

23
24
25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 25, 2014
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

27
28

2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3