Hicks v. Hamkar et al

Filing 22

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/11/14 ORDERING that Defendants motion for an extension of time 21 is granted; Defendants shall file their response to the FAC, through an answer or a motion to dismiss, within 45 days after the court issues an order determining whether plaintiffs in forma pauperis status should be revoked.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
MICHAEL HICKS,

Case No. 2:13-cv-01687-DAD P

12
Plaintiff, ORDER
13
v.
14
15

BEHROZ HAMKAR, et al.,

16

Defendants.

17
18

Defendants B. Hamkar, A. Nangalama, M. Sayre, and S. Yeboah (Johnson) (“Defendants”)

19

have filed an ex parte Application for an extension of time in which to respond to the First

20

Amended Complaint (“FAC”) in this action. Having considered the Application, the Court finds

21

good cause to grant the request.

22

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

23

1. Defendants’ motion for an extension of time (Doc. No. 21) is granted;

24

2. Defendants shall file their response to the FAC, through an answer or a motion to

25

dismiss, within forty-five (45) days after the court issues an order determining whether plaintiff’s

26

in forma pauperis status should be revoked.

27

Dated: December 11, 2014

28

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

/hick1687.36rp