Randle v. Franklin, et al.

Filing 72

ORDER GRANTING Defendants' 71 Amended First Request for Extension of Time to Respond Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions; ORDER DENYING AS MOOT Defendants' First 70 Request for Extension of Time to Respond Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions signed by District Judge James A Teilborg on 11/2/2010. Defendants' Responses due by 11/5/2010. (Sant Agata, S)

(PC) Randle v. Franklin, et al.

Doc. 72

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 For good cause shown, the Court will grant Defendants' first request for a seven-day extension of time to file and serve their response to Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions (Doc. # 67). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Amended First Request for Extension of Time to Respond Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions (Doc. # 71) is GRANTED. Defendants must file and serve their response on or before November 5, 2010. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' First Request for Extension of Time to Respond Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions (Doc. # 70) is DENIED as moot. DATED this 2nd day of November, 2010. vs. L.V. Franklin et al., Defendant. Willie D. Randle, Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-08-00845-JAT ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Dockets.Justia.com