Shahrivar v. City of San Jose et al

Filing 303

ORDER RE SCHEDULING (granting in part and denying in part 302 Administrative Motion.) (rslc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/31/2023)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

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 RE SCHEDULING

12
13

DAVID SYKES, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15
16

Plaintiff has filed an “administrative motion” seeking scheduling and other relief with

17

respect to motions he has filed or may later file, and regarding a motion for attorney fees and a

18

cost bill filed by defendants. Plaintiff presently has pending a motion under Rule 59, set to be

19

heard on September 29, 2023. By prior order, defendants’ motion for attorney fees will be decided

20

without a hearing. Plaintiff represents he may file an additional motion under Rule 60. Plaintiff

21

contend he needs additional time in light of his pro se status and limited availability of the pro se

22

help desk.

23

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), plaintiff’s Rule 59 motion (Dkt. 291) will be decided

24

without oral argument, and the hearing is vacated. The deadline for opposition to that motion is

25

extended to October 5, 2023, with any reply to be filed no later than October 12, 2023. Any

26

further motion plaintiff may file under Rule 60 or otherwise will also be decided without oral

27

argument. Any such motion must be filed at least two weeks prior to October 5, 2023, and shall

28

thereafter follow the same briefing schedule as the pending Rule 59 motion. Plaintiff is cautioned,

1

however, that nothing in this order extends any deadlines to file a Rule 60 or other motion that is

2

not already pending.

3

Plaintiff’s deadline for opposing the attorney fee motion is also extended to October 5,

4

2023, with any reply to be filed no later than October 12, 2023. Plaintiff’s deadline for filing any

5

objections to defendants’ cost bill is likewise extended to October 5, 2023. Plaintiffs’ request to

6

stay proceedings on the fee motion and the cost bill pending resolution of his post-trial motions

7

and/or his Ninth Circuit appeal is denied.

8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Dated: August 31, 2023
______________________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
Chief United States District Judge

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

CASE NO.

2

10-cv-01029-RS