Allen, et al v. County of Lake, et al

Filing 94

ORDER re: Plaintiffs' briefing. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 02/02/2015. (tehlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/2/2015)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

MONA ALLEN, et al.,

5

Plaintiffs,

6
7
8

v.
COUNTY OF LAKE, et al.,

Case No. 14-cv-03934-TEH
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS’
BRIEFING

Defendants.

9
10

Plaintiffs in this case have demonstrated a troubling pattern of filing documents at

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

the last minute, or even minutes late, and subsequently filing “amended” or “corrected”

12

versions a day or more later, after the deadlines have passed. For example, in briefing the

13

most recent motions to dismiss, Plaintiffs first filed their opposition at midnight on January

14

8 (although it was due on January 7), and then filed a “corrected” opposition at 1:14 PM

15

later that day. Previously, Plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to amend their complaint on

16

their self-suggested deadline of October 20, 2014, and then filed an “amended motion” on

17

October 24. These are just two examples of a broader pattern of filing modified

18

documents after the deadlines have passed.

19

There is no five-second rule in the federal courts. The Court is grateful that

20

Defendants have not raised objections to these late filings, even though such filings

21

confuse matters and require additional effort in drafting a response. However, Plaintiffs

22

are hereby warned that late filings shall not be considered in the future, and will be subject

23

to monetary sanctions.

24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27
28

Dated: 02/02/15

_____________________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge