Rosenblum v. Mule Creek State Prison Medical Staff et al

Filing 22

ORDER GRANTING 21 Defendants' Motion for Extension of Time to File a Responsive Pleading, signed by Senior Judge Stephen M. McNamee on 8/10/2009. Responsive Pleading due by 9/25/2009. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
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 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Mule Creek State Prison Medical Staff, et) ) al., ) ) Defendants. ) Phillip Rosenblum, No. CV 1-08-0448-SMM ORDER Before the Court is Defendants Diep, Igbinosa, Das, Akintola, Galloway, Nale, and McLean's Request for Extension of Time to File a Responsive Pleading (Doc. 21). Defendants request a forty-five (45) day extension, until September 25, 2009, to file a responsive pleading. Defense counsel recently received portions of Plaintiff's central file and medical records that consist of approximately five hundred pages. Defense counsel needs additional time to review these documents and consult with Defendants regarding Plaintiff's claims. Additionally, defense counsel recently learned that Plaintiff was a party to another case involving similar claims of failure to provide proper medical treatment and several of the same Defendants. The extension of time will allow defense counsel to review this related case and its relevance to the current action. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED GRANTING Defendants Diep, Igbinosa, Das, Akintola, Galloway, Nale, and McLean's Request for Extension of Time to File a Responsive Pleading (Doc. 21). 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 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Diep, Igbinosa, Das, Akintola, Galloway, Nale, and McLean shall file their responsive pleading on or before September 25, 2009. DATED this 10th day of August, 2009. -2-

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?