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)

Download PDF
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?