Ashker v. Alameida et al

Filing 230

ORDER re 226 RE EX PARTE APPLICATION AND APPLICATION FOR COURT TO SET DISCOVERY DEADLINE AND DISPOSITIVE MOTION FILING DEADLINE. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 11/7/08. (scc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/7/2008)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
As explained in Civil Local Rule 1-5(d), "Ex parte means contact with the Court without the advance knowledge or contemporaneous participation of all other parties." While styled as an "ex parte" motion, Defendants did file a certificate of service with their ex parte application.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TODD ASHKER, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT HOREL, et al., Defendants. /

No. 05-03759 CW ORDER RE EX PARTE APPLICATION AND APPLICATION FOR COURT TO SET DISCOVERY DEADLINE AND DISPOSITIVE MOTION FILING DEADLINE

On October 31, 2008, Defendants filed an Ex Parte Application and Application for Court to Set Discovery Deadline and Dispositive Motion Filing Date. Civil Local Rule 7-10(a) permits the filing of

ex parte motions only where authorized by statute, federal rule, local rule or standing order, unless otherwise ordered by the assigned judge.1 Defendants cite no authority that would permit Accordingly,

Defendants to file their motion on an ex parte basis. the Court sets the following briefing schedule.

Plaintiff's

response to Defendants' motion to set February 9, 2009, as the discovery cutoff deadline will be due November 21, 2008, and any

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

reply by Defendants will be due December 1, 2008. be decided on the papers.

The motion will

Defendants also move to set February 16, 2009, as the dispositive motion deadline. The dispositive motion deadline was

previously set in the Court's Order for Service and for Protective Order filed January 26, 2006. "No later than ninety days (90) days from the date their answer is due, Defendants shall file a motion for summary judgment or other dispositive motion." Defendants

filed a motion for summary judgment On September 4, 2007, and on August 25, 2008, the Court issued an Order Granting Motion for Summary Judgment in Part and Denying It in Part. 2008, the Court set this case for trial. On September 29,

If Defendants want to

file another motion for summary judgment, Defendants will need to file a motion for leave of Court to do so and to continue the pretrial and trial dates. IT IS SO ORDERED. 11/7/08 Dated CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ASHKER, Plaintiff, v. ALAMEIDA ET AL et al, Defendant.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case Number: CV05-03759 CW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

/

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. That on November 7, 2008, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Brendan Maguire Kenny Office of the Attorney General Correctional Law Section 455 Golden Gate Avenue Suite #11000 San Francisco, CA 94102 J. Randall Andrada Andrada & Associates Professional Corporation 180 Grand Avenue Suite 225 Oakland, CA 94612 Todd A. Ashker #C58191 Pelican Bay State Prison Box 7500 Crescent City, CA 95532 Dated: November 7, 2008 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: Sheilah Cahill, Deputy Clerk

3