Ransom v. Herrera et al
Filing
127
ORDER Re: Defendants' Request for Clarification of March 19, 2018 Minute Order 126 , signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 3/23/2018. (Hellings, J)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
11
LEONARD RANSOM, JR.,
Plaintiff,
12
v.
13
14
DANNY HERRERA and RICKY
BRANNUM,
15
Case No. 1:11-cv-01709-LJO-EPG (PC)
ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR
CLARIFICATION OF MARCH 19, 2018
MINUTE ORDER
(ECF NO. 126)
Defendants.
16
17
18
On March 19, 2018, the Court issued a minute order stating that: “The parties, as well
19
as third parties K. Holland and S. Kernan, should be prepared to discuss the motions to quash
20
(ECF Nos. 121 & 122 ) at the discovery and status conference on April 4, 2018.” (ECF No.
21
125).
22
On March 22, 2018, counsel for Defendants and third parties K. Holland and S. Kernan
23
(“Counsel”) filed a request for clarification. (ECF No. 126). Counsel states that Defendants
24
and K. Holland and S. Kernan will be prepared to discuss the motions to quash, but requests
25
clarification regarding whether Plaintiff needs to file opposition(s) to the motions. Counsel
26
argues that the ability to discuss the motions will be limited without the benefit of Plaintiff’s
27
opposition.
28
In issuing the minute order on March 19, 2018, the Court did not alter the deadlines laid
1
1
out in Local Rule 230(l). Under Local Rule 230(l), Plaintiff’s opposition is due before the
2
discovery and status conference.
3
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
March 23, 2018
/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?