Penton v. Hubard et al

Filing 229

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 06/18/20 GRANTING 228 Plaintiff's Motion. Plaintiff Anthony Penton is allowed up to 40 pages for his opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Donahoo, Salas, Walker, Bradford, Lynch, Virga, Morrow, and Gaddi in this action on June 10, 2020 220 . (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
1 8 Harrison J. Frahn IV (SBN: 206822) hfrahn@stblaw.com Michael R. Morey (SBN: 313003) michael.morey@stblaw.com Justin J. Calderon (SBN: 321405) justin.calderon@stblaw.com Kourtney J. Kinsel (SBN: 324370) kourtney.kinsel@stblaw.com Raul G. Duran (SBN: 324248) raul.duran@stblaw.com SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP 2475 Hanover Street Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 251-5000 Facsimile: (650) 251-5002 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff Anthony Penton 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 14 15 ANTHONY PENTON, 16 17 18 19 20 21 Plaintiff, Case No. 2:11-cv-00518 TLN KJN P [PROPOSED] ORDER v. LAYTON JOHNSON, JR., JAMES WALKER, TIMOTHY VIRGA, BRYAN DONAHOO, JOLENE NUNEZ, JANICE BRADFORD, ROLF MORROW, RONALD GADDI, JOHN LYNCH, GILBERT SALAS, AND DOES 1 THROUGH 13, 22 Defendants. 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. 2:11-CV-00518-TLN-KJN 1 2 Plaintiff filed a motion to exceed the page limit for his opposition to the motion for summary judgment. 3 GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 228) is granted; and 5 2. Plaintiff Anthony Penton is allowed up to forty (40) pages for his opposition to the 6 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Donahoo, Salas, Walker, Bradford, Lynch, 7 Virga, Morrow, and Gaddi in this action on June 10, 2020 (ECF No. 220). 8 Dated: June 18, 2020 9 10 pent0518.pg2 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 CASE NO. 2:11-CV-00518-TLN-KJN

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?