Mendy et al v. City of Fremont et al

Filing 38

ORDER VACATING HEARING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on April 30, 2014. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/30/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

JOHN RAY MENDY, MARY MENDY,

11
12
13

No. C-13-4180 MMC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER VACATING HEARING ON
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

v.
CITY OF FREMONT, et al.,
Defendants.

14

/

15
16

Before the Court is defendants’ “Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended

17

Complaint,” filed March 27, 2014. Plaintiffs John Ray Mendy and Mary Mendy have filed

18

opposition, to which defendants have replied.1 Having read and considered the papers

19

filed in support of and in opposition to the motion, the Court deems the matter suitable for

20

determination on the parties’ respective written submissions, and hereby VACATES the

21

hearing scheduled for May 2, 2014.

22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23
24

Dated: April 30, 2014
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

25
26
1

27
28

Defendants failed to provide the Court with a chambers copy of their reply.
Nonetheless, the Court has considered it. For future reference, defendants are reminded
that, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 5-1(e)(7) and the Court’s Standing Orders, parties are
required to provide for use in chambers one paper copy of each document that is filed
electronically.