Century Surety Company v. Mo Foods, LLC et al
Filing
44
ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 12/2/2013 DENYING 35 Ex Parte Application for an order shortening time. (Donati, J)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
9
CENTURY SURETY COMPANY, an
Ohio Corporation,
Plaintiff,
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
v.
No.
2:13-cv-01387-GEB-EFB
ORDER DENYING EX PARTE
APPLICATION
MO FOODS, LLC, a limited
liability company; MANISH
PATEL, an individual; TMPM,
LLC, a limited liability
company; PRADIP PATEL, an
individual, NEHA PATEL, an
individual; SEAN CANILOA, an
individual; RUBEN MORALES; an
individual; WAYNE PERARANDA;
an individual; DEBORAH
PENARANDA; an individual; and
PATRICK PENARANDA; an
individual,
Defendants.
Defendants filed an ex parte application for an order
shortening time, (ECF No. 35), for hearing on their motion to
stay this action. (ECF No. 38.) The request to shorten time is
premised on language in the Status Order, (ECF No. 30), which
Defendants erroneously assume dictated that Plaintiff could not
file a summary judgment motion until after Defendants filed their
motion to stay this action. The Status Order did not address this
motion filing timing issue, and, therefore, that order does not
28
1
1
support
2
Defendants also argue in a conclusory manner that if the Court
3
fails to grant Defendants’ ex parte application, “Defendants will
4
not have an opportunity to argue why this entire action should be
5
stayed in the interest of justice . . . and efficient judicial
6
administration.” (Aff. in Supp. Of Ex Parte Application ¶ 6, ECF
7
No. 36.) However, Defendants have delayed in seeking a stay and
8
have not shown that they are without any other option. Therefore,
9
the ex parte application is DENIED.
10
granting
Dated:
the
order
shortening
December 2, 2013
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
time
Defendant
seeks.
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?