Shahrivar v. City of San Jose et al

Filing 272

ORDER RESETTING HEARING AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE (rslc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/29/2023)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

FARID SHAHRIVAR,

Case No. 10-cv-01029-RS

Plaintiff,
11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

v.

ORDER RESETTING HEARING AND
BRIEFING SCHEDULE

12
13

DAVID SYKES, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15
16

Nearly a week after it was due, plaintiff filed an opposition to defendants’ motion for

17

summary judgment. Plaintiff did not seek either an extension or leave to file a late opposition, and

18

did not even acknowledge the filing was late. Although the conduct of plaintiff’s counsel cannot

19

be condoned, the interest in resolving motions on the merits warrants allowing plaintiff’s

20

opposition to be considered. To prevent prejudice to defendants, their deadline to file a reply brief

21

is extended to July 13, 2023, and the hearing is continued to July 20, 2023.

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25
26
27
28

Dated: June 29, 2023
______________________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
Chief United States District Judge