Mitchell et al v. City of Pittsburg et al

Filing 246

ORDER CHANGING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 244 (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 8/16/2012)

1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
TIMOTHY MITCHELL, SR., et al.

No. C 09-00794 SI

6
Plaintiffs,

ORDER CHANGING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE

7
v.
8
9
United States District Court
United States District Court
For the Northern District of of California
For the Northern District California

10
11
12

CITY OF PITTSBURG, et al.,
Defendants.

/

On August 13, 2012, the Court issued an Order partially reinstating summary judgment in this
case, and requesting further briefing on the question of qualified immunity for defendants. The Court

13
set a briefing schedule, with defendants’ brief due on August 23, 2012 and plaintiffs’ response due by
14
August 28, 2012. Both defendant Wielsch and plaintiffs have requested additional time to file their
15
briefs. Wielsch filed a Motion to Extend Time requesting a two-week extension; plaintiffs submitted
16
a letter requesting seven days, rather than five, to respond once defendants’ briefs are submitted. The
17
remaining defendants have not requested any additional time.
18
The Court hereby sets the following briefing schedule: all defendants’ briefs shall be due by
19
September 6, 2012; plaintiff’s response is due by September 13, 2012.
20
Counsel are informed that they shall no longer communicate with the Court via letter. Instead,
21
counsel must follow the Civil Local Rules for their submissions to the Court. See, e.g., Civ. L. R. 6-3
22
(setting forth rules for motions to extend time).
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
25
Dated: August 16, 2012
26
27
28

SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge