Patel v. State of California
Filing
22
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/22/2016 GRANTING 21 Request to Continue the Status Conference; CONTINUING the Initial Scheduling Conference to 1/19/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 25 (KJN) before Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman. (Michel, G.)
1
2
RICHARD M. ROGERS, #045843
LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD M. ROGERS
4
100 Bush Street, #1980
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone:
415/981-9788
Facsimile:
415/981-9798
Email:
RogersRMR@yahoo.com
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff
3
6
DEV PATEL
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
DEV PATEL,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF )
PUBLIC HEALTH AND DEPARTMENT OF )
TOXIC SUBSTANCES,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 2:15-cv-02471- KJN
Case filed:
Case reassigned:
Trial date:
REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF
STATUS CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED]
ORDER
________________
Date:
Time:
Location:
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case 2:15-cv-02471--KJN -- REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF STATUS CONFERENCE; ORDER
PATEL/
/15-2471 Patel
11/30/15
07/20/16
TBA
v. State of California Order Approving Stip to Continue Status Conference
01/05/17
10:00 a.m.
Courtroom 25, 8th floor
1
Plaintiff requests a continuance of the Status Conference from January 5, 2017, to
2
January 19, 2017, on the ground that Plaintiff’s counsel has a vacation scheduled from January 2
3
through 9, 2017.
4
Defense counsel has no objection to the continuance.
5
6
Respectfully submitted,
Dated:____12/09/16_________________
LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD M. ROGERS
7
8
By:__/s/ Richard M. Rogers__________________
RICHARD M. ROGERS
Attorneys for Plaintiff
9
10
11
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED.
12
Dated: December 22, 2016
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case 2:15-cv-02471--KJN -- REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF STATUS CONFERENCE; ORDER
PATEL/
/15-2471 Patel
1
v. State of California Order Approving Stip to Continue Status Conference
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?