Lam et al v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 140

ORDER by Judge Hamilton Denying 137 Motion to Demand Defendants' Counsel to Temporarily Postpone Discovery (pjhlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/5/2011) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/5/2011: # 1 Certificate of Service) (nah, COURT STAFF).

Lam et al v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Doc. 140

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ALFRED LAM, et al., 8 Plaintiff, 9 v. 10 No. C 08-4702 PJH ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DEMAND DEFENDANTS' COUNSEL TO TEMPORARILY POSTPONE DISCOVERY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, et al., Defendants. _______________________________/

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

The court is in receipt of plaintiffs' motion to demand defendants' counsel to temporarily postpone any further discovery, and defendants' opposition thereto. Plaintiffs' request for an extension of discovery deadlines and/or a suspension of discovery is DENIED, since, for the reasons advanced by defendants, plaintiffs have failed to present any good cause justifying the grant of such a request. Plaintiffs are further instructed to file with the court a statement containing all plaintiffs' contact information, no later than April 18, 2011. However, as plaintiffs now proceed in pro per, they are not required to comply with electronic case filing requirements.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 5, 2011 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

Dockets.Justia.com