McColm v. Foremost Insurance Company

Filing 65

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME; AND ORDERING DEFENDANT TO RESUBMIT ITS LETTER BRIEF REGARDING CONDUCT AS A NOTICED MOTION (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/20/2010)

McColm v. Foremost Insurance Company

Doc. 65

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v. FOREMOST INSURANCE CO, Defendant. / PATRICIA A MCCOLM, Plaintiff, No. C 09-04132 SI ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME; AND ORDERING DEFENDANT TO RESUBMIT ITS LETTER BRIEF REGARDING CONDUCT AS A NOTICED MOTION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Several disputes between the parties have arisen during the discovery process. On August 16, 2010, defendant filed a "Letter Brief Re Discovery Responses Per Standing Order #2." On August 31, 2010, defendant filed a "Letter Brief re Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Further Responses to Rule 26(a) Disclosures." Finally, on September 10, 2010, defendant filed a "Letter Brief Re Motion to Prohibit Pro Per Plaintiff Patricia McColm From Engaging in Verbally Abusive Conduct." On September 17, 2010, plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, filed an emergency ex parte application for enlargement of time to respond to defendant's August 16 and August 31 letter briefs. In her application, plaintiff also raised an objection to defendant's use of a letter brief rather than a noticed motion to address plaintiff's alleged conduct. The Court has reviewed the September 10 letter brief, and notes that the letter brief raises issues that do not ordinarily arise during discovery and requests relief that is not ordinarily granted in discovery disputes. Good cause having been shown, it is hereby ordered that plaintiff's application for a 45 day extension to respond to defendant's August 16 and August 31 letter briefs is GRANTED. (Document 64.) Plaintiff's responses are due October 26, 2010, and November 4, 2010, respectively.

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

The Court also orders defendant to refile its September 10 letter brief as a motion, noticed for hearing on December 16, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 10. Defendant's motion should be filed by October 1, 2010. Per this Court's August 15 Order permitting Plaintiff additional time to respond to motions filed in this case, Plaintiff's opposition is due November 5, 2010. Defendant's reply is due November 9, 2010. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 20, 2010

SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge

2