Guice et al v. D&R Construction, Inc et al

Filing 5

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT NEVEAUX'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME; CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS; DIRECTIONS TO DEFENDANT NEVEAUX. No later than August 21, 2009, Neveaux shall file a response to the comp laint. The Case Management Conference is continued from July 17, 2009 to September 18, 2009; a Joint Case Management Statement shall be filed no later than September 11, 2009. Plaintiffs are directed to serve a copy of this order on Neveaux and to fi le proof of such service no later than July 16, 2009. Neveaux is directed to provide the Court with an address at which he may be served with documents in this case, and to do so no later than 14 days from the date on which plaintiffs serve him with a copy of this order. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on July 14, 2009. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/14/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiffs did not provide the Court with a chambers copy of their Statement. For future reference, plaintiffs are reminded of the following provision in the Court's Standing Orders: "In all cases that have been assigned to the Electronic Case Filing Program, the parties are required to provide for use in chambers one paper copy of each document that is filed electronically. The paper copy of each such document shall be delivered no later than noon on the day after the document is filed electronically. The paper copy shall be marked `Chambers Copy' and shall be delivered to the Clerk's Office in an envelope clearly marked with the judge's name, case number, and `E-Filing Chambers Copy.'" 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KENNETH GUICE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. D&R CONSTRUCTION, et al., Defendants / No. C-09-1464 MMC ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT NEVEAUX'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME; CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS; DIRECTIONS TO DEFENDANT NEVEAUX United States District Court Before the Court is plaintiffs' Case Management Conference Statement, filed July 8, 2009.1 Also before the Court is defendant Damian Neveaux's ("Neveaux") Motion for Enlargement of Time to Obtain Counsel to Respond to Civil Summons, filed July 1, 2009. In their Statement, plaintiffs state they have been unsuccessful in determining from their process server whether defendant D&R Construction ("D&R") has been served. According, the Court finds a continuance of the Case Management Conference is appropriate to afford plaintiffs the opportunity to serve D&R, if D&R in fact remains 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 unserved, and to file proof of service as to such defendant. In his motion, Neveaux, who has been served, requests a 120-day extension of time to respond to the complaint so that he may seek counsel. Although Neveaux fails to provide good cause for a continuance of 120 days, the Court finds it appropriate to grant a limited extension. Accordingly, the Case Management Conference is hereby CONTINUED, and Neveaux's motion is hereby GRANTED in part, as follows: 1. No later than August 21, 2009, Neveaux shall file a response to the complaint. 2. The Case Management Conference is continued from July 17, 2009 to September 18, 2009. A Joint Case Management Statement shall be filed no later than September 11, 2009. Plaintiffs are hereby DIRECTED to serve a copy of this order on Neveaux and to file proof of such service no later than July 16, 2009. Further, Neveaux is hereby DIRECTED to provide the Court with an address at which he may be served with documents in this case, and to do so no later than 14 days from the date on which plaintiffs serve him with a copy of this order.2 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 14, 2009 MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge 2 Neveaux has not provided the Court with a service address. 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?