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
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?