Huynh v. United States Postal Service et al

Filing 42

ORDER re Briefing Schedule 40 , 41 . Signed by Judge Nathanael M. Cousins on November 2, 2011. (nclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/2/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 9 10 PHU G. HUYNH, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 14 15 Case No. 11-cv-03195 NC ORDER AMENDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE and PATRICK R. DONAHOE, Re: Dkt. Nos. 40, 41 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff Phu Huynh requests that the Court change the briefing schedule for Defendants’ 19 Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 40). Defendants object to the request (Dkt. No. 41). The Court 20 previously adopted Judge Wilken’s briefing schedule, which required Plaintiff to file his 21 opposition by November 15, 2011 and Defendants to file their reply by November 22, 2011 22 (Dkt. No. 39). The motion to dismiss hearing was scheduled for November 30, 2011. 23 24 25 26 27 28 On November 1, 2011, the Court referred this case to the ADR Program for mediation. The mediation cutoff date is January 17, 2012. For good cause showing, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s request and amends the briefing schedule on the motion to dismiss as follows: The deadline for Plaintiff to file his opposition is now January 25, 2012. Defendants’ reply shall be filed on or before February 1, 2012. The motion to dismiss will be heard on Case No. 11-cv-03195 NC ORDER AMENDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 1 February 8, 2012 at 9:00 a.m., in Courtroom A, 15th Floor, United States Courthouse, 450 2 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 DATED: November 2, 2011 ____________________________ NATHANAEL M. COUSINS United States Magistrate Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. 11-cv-03195 NC ORDER AMENDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 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?