McGuire v. Frye et al

Filing 19

ORDER GRANTING 18 DEFENDANT'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING.(whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/17/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
JOHN PATRICK MCGUIRE,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANT’S EX PARTE
APPLICATION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
RESPONSIVE PLEADING

WILLIAM FRYE, et al.,
Defendants.
/

15
16

No. C 15-05224 WHA

A previous order adopted in full the report of Magistrate Judge Joe Spero, which

17

recommended that plaintiff John McGuire’s pro se complaint be dismissed (Dkt. No. 10).

18

Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on March 17, 2016, which was served on defendant on

19

April 28, 2016. Now, defendant asks the court for an extension of 30 days to respond to

20

plaintiff’s complaint in order to obtain certified records from the Sonoma County Court.

21

Defendant contends that the court records will show that the claims alleged in plaintiff’s

22

amended complaint are barred by res judicata. Defendant has not previously sought an

23

extension of time. According to a declaration by defendant’s attorney, plaintiff has been

24

contacted about the extension and is agreeable to it. Defendant’s application for an extension is

25

GRANTED. Defendant shall respond to the amended complaint by NOON ON JUNE 20, 2016.

26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
28

Dated: May 17, 2016.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE