Schoppe-Rico v. CDCR Director of Prisons et al

Filing 68

ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting in part and denying in part 52 Defendants' Motion for Extension of Time to File a Dispositive Motion. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/5/2013)

Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 JOHN M. SCHOPPE-RICO, 4 No. C 11-1089 YGR (PR) ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A DISPOSITIVE MOTION Plaintiff, 5 6 7 v. ROBERT A. HOREL, et al., Defendants. 8 / 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Defendants move for an extension of time to file their dispositive motion. Specifically, they seek an extension to a date that is ninety days after the November 20, 2013 settlement conference in this matter,1 up to and including February 18, 2014. The amount of time requested by Defendants is not warranted based on the record presented. The Order of Service in this matter was issued on July 23, 2013. Because Defendants were requested to waive service of the summons, the Court gave them an extended deadline to file their answer and dispositive motion. Therefore, Defendants have had ample time to file their dispositive motion. However, having read and considered Defendants' request and the accompanying declaration of counsel, the Court finds that Defendants have made a sufficient showing for a sixtyday extension of time. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' request for an extension of time is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. While the Court DENIES Defendants' request for a ninety-day extension, it finds that a sixty-day extension is warranted. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Defendants a sixty-day extension, and their dispositive motion shall be filed no later than January 20, 2014. Plaintiff's opposition to the dispositive motion shall be filed with the Court and served on Defendants no later than twenty-eight (28) days after the date Defendants' motion is filed. Defendants shall file a reply brief no later than fourteen (14) days after the date Plaintiff's 27 28 1 Magistrate Judge Nandor Vadas's chambers has informed the undersigned judge's chambers that this matter did not settle on November 20, 2013. 1 opposition is filed. No further extensions of time will be granted in this matter absent extraordinary 2 circumstances. 3 This Order terminates Docket no. 52. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 DATED: December 5, 2013 6 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 7 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 G:\PRO-SE\YGR\CR.11\Schoppe-Rico1089.grantIP&denyIP-EOT-msj.wpd 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?