Murphy v. United States Forest Service, et al.
Filing
81
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 02/23/16 ORDERING that the date for defendants' opposition and cross-motion is CONTINUED to 02/25/16; all other dates remain unchanged. (Benson, A)
1
2
3
4
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
GREGORY T. BRODERICK
Assistant United States Attorney
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: (916) 554-2700
Facsimile: (916) 554-2900
5
Attorneys for Defendants
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
11
12
13
14
DENNIS D. MURPHY
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE;
TOM TIDWELL, in his official capacity as
Chief of the United States Forest Service;
and NANCY J. GIBSON, in her official
capacity as Forest Supervisor of the United
States Forest Service,
Defendants
CASE NO. 13-cv-02315-TLN-AC
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME
15
16
To further promote the parties' efforts toward resolution, and in the interest of judicial economy,
17
the parties hereby stipulate and propose that the due date for Defendants' opposition and cross-motion be
18
continued to February 25, 2016. All other dates remain unchanged. Resolution, if achievable, will save
19
the parties and the Court significant resources, and there is thus good cause for this brief continuance.
20
Respectfully submitted,
21
DATED: February 19, 2016
22
By
23
/s/ Paul S. Weiland (auth. 2/19/16)
Attorney for Plaintiff
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
24
By:
25
26
/s/ Gregory T. Broderick
GREGORY T. BRODERICK
Assistant United States Attorney
27
28
29
30
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
1
1
IT IS SO ORDERED.
2
3
Dated: February 23, 2016
4
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
2
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?