Muhammad v. Berreth et al

Filing 69

ORDER RE-SETTING HEARING. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 1/8/2013. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/8/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15

No. C 12-02407 CRB

JAMES KARIM MUHAMMAD,

ORDER RE-SETTING HEARING

Plaintiff,
v.
KEVIN J. BERRETH,
Defendant.

/

16
17

Defendants Terese McNamee, Kevin J. Berreth, and R. Mac Prout filed two motions to

18

dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. See Mots. (dkts. 52, 53). Plaintiff failed to timely file

19

an opposition brief to either motion, and so the Court ordered him to show cause why his case

20

should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

21

See OSC (dkt. 63). Plaintiff timely responded to the OSC, see Response (dkt. 68), and so the Court

22

will not dismiss his case for failure to prosecute. However, the Court will allow McNamee, Berreth,

23

and Prout to file a Reply brief, by 5:00 p.m. on January 14, 2013, if they wish to do so. The hearing

24

on those motions is hereby RE-SET for February 15, 2013 – the same date as the motion to dismiss

25

filed by defendant Superior Court of the State of California (dkt. 62).

26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
28

Dated: January 8, 2013

G:\CRBALL\2012\2407\order re-setting.wpd

CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE