Center for Food Safety et al v. Connor et al

Filing 476

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 6/10/10. (jjo, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/10/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY, et al. Plaintiffs, v. CHARLES CONNOR, et al. Defendants. / ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME No. C 08-00484 JSW

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

The Court HEREBY GRANTS Plaintiffs' administrative motion to shorten time on their motion to strike the declaration of Susan Henley Manning, Ph.D. Any opposition shall be filed by no later than June 18, 2010. Plaintiffs' reply, if any, shall be filed by no later than June 25, 2010. Intervener-Defendants' request, contained in their proposed order in opposition to Plaintiffs' motion to shorten time, to hold a final pretrial conference is DENIED. With the exception of Defendants' and Intervener-Defendants' replies due on June 18, the briefing and submission of evidence in support of and in opposition to the motion for permanent relief is now closed. If any party seeks to file any supplemental brief or evidence in addition to the upcoming June 18 filing by Defendants and Intervener-Defendants, such party will need leave of Court and will be required to show extremely good cause. If Defendants or Intervener-Defendants have legitimate evidentiary objections to evidence Plaintiffs submitted in connection with their opposition and reply filed on June 4, 2010, such objections shall be filed by no later than June 18, 2010. Plaintiffs may file a

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

response to any such objections by no later than June 23, 2010. If Plaintiffs have any legitimate evidentiary objections to evidence Defendants or Intervener-Defendants submit in connection with their replies on June 18, 2010, such objections shall be filed by no later than June 23, 2010. Defendants and Intervener-Defendants may file a response to any such objections by no later than June 28, 2010. Any evidentiary objections that the parties have regarding evidence submitted in connection with the briefs and evidence filed on April 9 or May 7, 2010, that have not already been asserted, are deemed waived. Such objections, if any, should have been filed with the May 7 or June 4, 2010 briefs, respectively. The Court will not consider any late filed evidentiary objections. As always, the parties shall be considerate of the Court's resources and are admonished to keep such objections to a minimum. In addition, the parties are admonished that the Court will not consider unauthorized filings without leave of Court. For example, Northern District Civil Local Rule 6-3 provides that a party may file a motion to change time and an opposition may be filed, but does not authorize a reply. Despite this fact, Plaintiffs filed a reply in support of their motion to shorten time. The parties should be aware that the Court has over four hundred cases and, thus, should make their best efforts to keep their filings and requests to the Court to a minimum. IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dated: June 10, 2010

JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2