Cannon v. City of Petaluma et al

Filing 99

ORDER. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 1/31/2012. (pjhlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/31/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 BENJAMIN PHILIP CANNON, 12 13 Plaintiff, v. 14 ORDER CITY OF PETALUMA, et al., 15 No. C 11-0651 PJH Defendants. _______________________________/ 16 17 During the course of the court’s review of the papers filed by the parties in 18 connection with defendants’ pending motions to dismiss the second amended complaint 19 (“SAC”), the following has come to the court’s attention. 20 The Sonoma County defendants filed their motion to dismiss the SAC on November 21 2, 2011. Plaintiff’s opposition was due on November 16, 2011. The Petaluma defendants 22 filed their motion to dismiss on November 3, 2011. Plaintiff’s opposition to that motion was 23 due on November 17, 2011. 24 On November 14, 2011, plaintiff filed an opposition to each of the two motions. 25 However, those oppositions were identical to the oppositions plaintiff had previously filed to 26 the defendants’ motions to dismiss the first amended complaint. On November 21, 2011, 27 defendants filed replies to the oppositions, noting that the oppositions were completely 28 unresponsive to the pending motions, which were motions to dismiss the SAC. 1 On December 2, 2011 – more than two weeks after his original oppositions were 2 due – plaintiff filed “amended” oppositions to each of the pending motions, in which he 3 responded to the arguments made by defendants in their motions to dismiss the SAC. 4 Although the late oppositions should be stricken, the court has determined that the 5 better course would be to permit defendants to file replies to the late-filed oppositions. The 6 replies shall be filed no later than February 15, 2012. The court also admonishes plaintiff 7 that further missed deadlines will not go unsanctioned. 8 9 Dated: January 31, 2012 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 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?