Medlock v. Taco Bell Corp., et al.

Filing 600

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION FOR ORDER EXTENDING 10-PAGE LIMIT FOR PLAINTIFFS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTIONS IN LIMINE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 1/27/2016. (Hernandez, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

SANDRIKA MEDLOCK, et al.,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’
APPLICATION FOR ORDER EXTENDING
10-PAGE LIMIT FOR PLAINTIFFS’ REPLY
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTIONS IN
LIMINE

Plaintiffs,

11
v.

12
13

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

TACO BELL CORP., et al.,
Defendants.

14

(ECF No. 599)

15
The Court has read and considered Plaintiffs’ motion to extend the page limit for

16

17 Plaintiffs’ reply brief. Considering the issues to be addressed and the extent of Plaintiffs’
18 original briefing, the Court finds that ten pages is sufficient for Plaintiffs to reply to Defendants’
19 opposition. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ request for an extension of the reply page limit is HEREBY
20 DENIED.
21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23 Dated:

January 27, 2016
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

1