William M. Bryson, Jr. v. Gerson

Filing 24

ORDER RE: Ex Parte Request to Extend Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment, Signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 8/3/2015. (Arellano, S.)

1
2
3
4

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
ALYSON A. BERG
Assistant United States Attorney
2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401
Fresno, California 93721
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

5
6

Attorneys for Defendant
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

WILLIAM M. BRYSON, JR.,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
SUSAN B. GERSON, AS ACTING
)
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE FREEDOM )
OF INFORMATION UNIT, OR HER
)
SUCCESSOR,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)

Case No. 1:13-cv-00879 LJO/MJS
EX PARTE REQUEST TO EXTEND
TIME TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT; ORDER

Defendant United States Department of Justice (“Defendant”), requests a continuance of the

18

time in which to respond to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

19

[Dkt No. 22].

20

Plaintiff requested, and was granted, an unopposed extension of time of thirty days within

21

which to oppose Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Said request was granted by Minute

22

Order dated June 23, 2015, [Dkt No. 21] allowing Plaintiff’s opposition to be filed on or before July

23

30, 2015. Plaintiff filed his Opposition on July 30, 2015 making Defendant’s reply due August 6,

24

2015. After Defense counsel agreed to the extension and the Court approved the same, she arranged

25

a vacation and will be out of the office three of the five business days by which the reply will be due.

26

Because Defense counsel will be out of the office, she will not have sufficient time to review

27

Plaintiff’s sixty-two (62) page opposition and prepare a meaningful response on behalf of the

28
29
30

EX PARTE REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION
TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER

1

1

Defendant. Therefore, Defendant is requesting a fourteen (14) day extension of time, to and

2

including August 20, 2015 by which to file its reply. No prejudice will be suffered by Plaintiff if this

3

brief extension is granted as there are no pending deadlines in this action.

4

Accordingly, for good cause showing, including the unavailability of counsel and the volume

5

of documents submitted with Plaintiff’s Opposition, Defendant requests a fourteen (14) day extension

6

of time, to and including August 20, 2015, by which to file its reply.
Respectfully submitted,

7
8

Dated: July 30, 2015

9

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

10
/s/Alyson A. Berg
ALYSON A. BERG
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorney for Defendant United States
Department of Justice

11
12
13
14
15

ORDER
For good cause showing and in accordance with Local Rule 144(c) (initial ex parte extension),

16

Defendant, United States Department of Justice, is granted an extension of time to and including

17

August 20, 2015, within which to file its reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for

18

Summary Judgment.

19
20
21

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 3, 2015

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

EX PARTE REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION
TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; ORDER

2