Andre-Gollihar v. County of San Joaquin, et al

Filing 94

ORDER granting 93 Motion for Extension of time signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/27/13: HEARING as to 90 MOTION to DISMISS and 91 MOTION to DISMISS CONTINUED to 11/21/2013 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SANDRA ANDRE-GOLLIHAR, et al.,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:09-cv-3313-TLN-KJN PS

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER

COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Pending before the court is defendants’ renewed motions to dismiss plaintiff’s fourth

18

amended complaint, noticed for hearing on October 3, 2013. (ECF Nos. 90, 91.) Plaintiff’s

19

opposition or statement of non-opposition to these motions are presently due on September 6,

20

2013. (ECF No. 92.) On August 21, 2013, plaintiff filed a motion for a two-month extension of

21

time with respect to her legal commitments. (ECF No. 93.) Plaintiff’s motion consists of two

22

doctor’s notes, which indicate that plaintiff is under medical care for “several grave medical

23

conditions including most recently, cancer surgery,” which took place on August 7, 2013, and

24

which renders her unlikely to withstand the physical demands of legal proceedings at this time.

25

(Id.) The most recent August 16, 2013 doctor’s note suggests a two-month extension as of the

26

date of the note. (Id.)

27

Because plaintiff apprised the court of her upcoming surgery at the July 25, 2013 status

28

conference, and the request is supported by medical documentation, the court grants plaintiff’s
1

1

motion for an approximately two-month extension and continues the hearing and briefing

2

deadlines as outlined below. However, as discussed in the court’s prior July 26, 2013 order and

3

findings and recommendations, this case was originally filed in 2009 and has already been subject

4

to numerous delays. Although plaintiff was not personally at fault for all the delays that ensued

5

in this action, defendants also deserve an opportunity to move this action forward to a resolution

6

on the merits. Therefore, plaintiff is cautioned that the court is strongly not inclined to grant any

7

further extensions. If plaintiff feels, upon expiration of the extension, that her medical condition

8

still prevents her from prosecuting this case, the court will have little choice but to recommend

9

dismissal of the action.

10

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1. Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 93) is GRANTED.

12

2. The October 3, 2013 hearing on defendants’ motions to dismiss is VACATED and

13

CONTINUED to Thursday November 21, 2013, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 25

14

before the undersigned.

15

3. Plaintiff shall file any opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’

16

motions no later than November 7, 2013. Failure to file an opposition or statement of

17

non-opposition to the motions by the required deadline will result in a

18

recommendation that the action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule

19

of Civil Procedure 41(b).

20

4. Defendants may file any reply brief no later than November 14, 2013.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22

Dated: August 27, 2013

23
24
25
26
27
28
2