Mosby v. Hamlet et al

Filing 41

ORDER REOPENING CASE: by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong GRANTING 39 Motion for Extension of Time to File a Dispositive Motion, GRANTING 39 MOTION to Lift Stay. Defendants may file their dispositive motion no later than 09/09/05; Plaintiff shall file his response no later than (45) forty-five days after receipt of Defendants' dispositive motion. (jlm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/14/2005) Modified on 7/19/2005 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

Mosby v. Hamlet et al

Doc. 41

Case 4:02-cv-05667-SBA

Document 41

Filed 07/14/2005

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA VINCENT A. MOSBY, ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. ) ) JAMES HAMLET, et al., ) ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________ ) No. C 02-5667 SBA (PR) ORDER (1) LIFTING STAY, (2) DIRECTING CLERK OF THE COURT TO REOPEN FILE, (3) GRANTING DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A DISPOSITIVE MOTION AND (4) SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE (Docket no. 39)

Plaintiff, a state prisoner incarcerated at the California Training Facility (CTF) in Soledad, California, filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court issued an Order of Service on March 8, 2004, and Defendants filed an Answer on June 21, 2004. On December 22, 2004, the Court entered a stay and directed the Clerk of the Court to administratively close this case pending the Supreme Court's ruling on the constitutionality of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act ("RLUIPA"), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1. On July 5, 2005, Defendants notified the Court that the Supreme Court decided Cutter v. Wilkinson, 125 S. Ct. 2113 (2005) and held that section 3 of RLUIPA did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Defendants request to lift the stay in this case. Defendants also request an extension of time, up to and including September 9, 2005, in which to file a dispositive motion. Having read and considered Defendants' ex parte requests and the accompanying declaration of counsel, and good cause appearing, The Court hereby GRANTS Defendants' request to lift the stay entered on December 22, 2004 (docket no. 39). The Clerk of the Court is directed to REOPEN the case file. The Court GRANTS Defendant's request for an extension of time to file a dispositive motion (docket no. 39). The time in which Defendants may file their dispositive motion will be extended to no later than September 9, 2005. Plaintiff shall file his response no later than fortyfive (45) days after receipt of Defendants' dispositive motion.

United United States District Court

12
For the Northern District of California

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 4:02-cv-05667-SBA

Document 41

Filed 07/14/2005

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Extensions of time are not favored, though reasonable extensions will be granted. However, the party making a motion for an extension of time is not relieved from his or her duty to comply with the deadlines set by the Court merely by having made a motion for an extension of time. The party making the motion must still meet the deadlines set by the Court until an order addressing the motion for an extension of time is issued. Any motion for an extension of time must be filed no later than fifteen (15) days prior to the deadline sought to be extended. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 7/14/05 __________________________________ SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG United States District Judge

United States District Court

12
For the Northern District of California

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

2