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).

Download PDF
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

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?