Cook v. City of California City et al
Filing
51
ORDER Extending Time for Defendants' Response to Second Amended Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 1/5/2017. Responsive pleading due by 1/25/2017. (Hall, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
CHARLES ACE COOK, JR,
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
vs.
CITY OF CALIFORNIA CITY, et al.
15
16
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 1:16-cv-00429-DAD-JLT
ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT
(Doc. 50)
17
18
On December 29, 2016, counsel filed a stipulation to continue the scheduling conference
19
based upon the representation by the defendants that they intended to filed motions to dismiss or
20
motions to strike the second amended complaint. (Doc. 47 at 2-3) The second amended complaint
21
had been filed just the day before but, apparently, the defendants had sufficient time to review the
22
complaint and to determine that it suffered from one or more pleading defect. The Court granted the
23
continuance. (Doc. 49)
24
Now, exactly one week later, counsel filed another stipulation. (Doc. 50) In this one, they
25
seek to extend the deadline by which the defendants must file their responsive pleadings. Id. In
26
support of the extension, defense counsel indicate that due to the length of the second amended
27
complaint, they need “additional time to evaluate” the complaint. Id. The Court is at a loss to
28
understand how they knew on December 29th that the complaint was infirm but now need more
1
1
time to “evaluate” it. Furthermore, they offer no explanation for their piecemeal approach when
2
presenting their stipulations to this Court.
3
Nevertheless, the Court will grant the stipulation. However, counsel are advised that the
4
Court will not entertain any further stipulations that seek to delay responding to the complaint or to
5
delay scheduling this case. The scheduling conference will go forward on March 29 regardless of
6
whether the defendants file motions to dismiss or strike, regardless of whether these motions have
7
been heard and regardless of whether the motions have been decided. Thus, the defendants are
8
strongly urged to expedite their “evaluation” of the complaint and to respond immediately.
9
ORDER
10
Based upon the foregoing, the Court ORDERS:
11
1.
12
The stipulation (Doc. 50) is GRANTED. The defendants SHALL file their
responsive pleading no later than January 25, 2017.
13
14
15
16
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
January 5, 2017
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?