Wilburn v. Bratcher et al

Filing 32

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 6/10/15 ORDERING that the 6/18/15 hearing on the motions to dismiss 15 , 20 filed by defendants Bratcher and Gweon, and the 8/6/15 hearing on plaintiff's 6 , 28 motion to remand, ar e VACATED. Plaintiff's 29 motion to continue, construed as a request for extension of time in which to file an opposition, is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff shall file his opposition to defendant Gweon's motion to dismiss by 7/9/2015. The motions will be submitted on the record after the time for filing opposition and replies have passed. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TERRENCE LAMAR WILBURN,

12
13

No. 2:15-cv-0699 TLN GGH PS

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

14

GARREN BRATCHER, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17
18

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action, referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local
Rule 302(c)(21).

19

Presently calendared for hearing on June 18, 2015 are motions to dismiss filed by

20

defendant Bratcher (ECF No. 15), and by defendant Gweon. (ECF Nos. 20, 21, 23, 24.) Plaintiff

21

has filed an opposition to Bratcher’s motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 31.) Plaintiff has not filed an

22

opposition to Gweon’s motion; however, he has filed a motion to continue the hearing on both of

23

the aforementioned motions to August 6, 2015 with an implied request to file his opposition at a

24

later time due to defendants’ alleged failure to serve plaintiff with the motions in a timely manner

25

and the change in hearing date on Gweon’s motion from January, 2016 to June, 2015. (ECF No.

26

29.) A review of the docket and proofs of service filed in conjunction with Gweon and Bratcher’s

27

motions to dismiss indicate that plaintiff was served with the motions at least twenty-eight (28)

28

days prior to the noticed hearing date of June 18, 2015. (ECF Nos. 19, 20.) See E.D. Local Rule
1

1

230(b). As plaintiff has now filed an opposition to Bratcher’s motion to dismiss, (ECF No. 31),

2

his request is moot as to that motion. In regard to defendant Gweon’s motion, plaintiff’s request

3

for a continuance in this regard will be construed as a request for extension of time in which to

4

oppose that motion and will be granted.

5
6

Also before the court is plaintiff’s motion to remand, filed April 20, 2015, and noticed for
hearing on August 6, 2015.1 (ECF Nos. 6, 28.)

7

Having reviewed the record, the court has determined that oral argument would not be of

8

material assistance in determining the aforementioned pending motions. Accordingly, the court

9

will not entertain oral argument, and will determine the motions on the record, including the

10

briefing in support of and in opposition to the pending motions. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(g).

11

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

12

1. The June 18, 2015 hearing on the motions to dismiss filed by defendants Bratcher and

13

Gweon, (ECF Nos. 15, 20), and the August 6, 2015 hearing on plaintiff’s motion to remand, (ECF

14

Nos. 6, 28), are vacated;

15

2. Plaintiff’s motion to continue, construed as a request for extension of time in which to

16

file an opposition, (ECF No. 29), is granted in part. Plaintiff shall file his opposition to defendant

17

Gweon’s motion to dismiss by July 9, 2015.

18

3. The motions will be submitted on the record after the time for filing opposition and

19

replies have passed.

20

Dated: June 10, 2015

21

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

22

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28

GGH:076/Wilburn0699.vac(2)

1

Plaintiff’s motion was previously noticed for June 4, 2015; however, plaintiff subsequently renoticed it. (ECF No. 17.)
2