Torres v. Saba et al

Filing 25

ORDER 24 . (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 1/11/2018)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MARIO TORRES, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Case No. 16-cv-06607-SI ORDER v. Re: Dkt. No. 24 NATALIE SABA, et al., Defendants. 12 13 Plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time to file a reply to defendants’ answer to the 14 third amended complaint. A reply to an answer only is allowed if the court orders one. See Fed. 15 R. Civ. P. 7(a). The court did not order plaintiff to file a reply to the answer, and a reply is not 16 necessary in this case. Accordingly, plaintiff’s request for an extension of the deadline to file a 17 reply to the answer is DENIED. (Docket No. 24.) 18 In his request, plaintiff also asked for clarification about two matters. First, he was 19 confused about the case number for this case, because the court had written it as 16-cv-6607 SI 20 and defendants had written the case number as C16-6607 SI. Both numbers refer to the same case, 21 but it is preferable that the parties use 16-cv-6607 SI because that is the way the case numbers now 22 are generated on the court’s electronic docketing system. Second, plaintiff was confused about the 23 severance of some claims. The purpose of a severance is to address the problem created by 24 plaintiff’s inclusion of unrelated claims in a single action; a severance will allow some claims to 25 be addressed in one action and other claims to be addressed in a separate action. The claims 26 against the Concord Police Department and its members arising out of events and omissions on 27 July 4, 2012 (i.e., the claims alleged at pages 9-14 and the requests for relief alleged at pages 28 43:11 to page 45 of the third amended complaint) will be addressed in Case No. 16-cv-6607 SI. 1 All the other claims and defendants will be addressed in a separate action, i.e., Case No. 17-cv- 2 6587 SI. The court will conduct an initial review of the pleading (which is a copy of the third 3 amended complaint) in Case No. 17-cv-6587 SI in due course. Plaintiff should be very careful to 4 put the number for the correct case on all future filings; it will almost never be correct to put both 5 case numbers on a single filing. Finally, plaintiff attached to his request a copy of defendants’ answer as well as the court’s 7 order of service and partial severance. It is unnecessary to submit with a new filing a copy of a 8 document that already exists in the court’s file -- the court can simply look at the copy already in 9 the file. If plaintiff wants to refer to a document that already is in the court’s file, he should 10 identify the document by its full title and date of filing, or by its docket number if he has that 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 6 information. 12 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 11, 2018 ______________________________________ SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?