Cunningham v. Schopp et al

Filing 55

ORDER RESCHEDULING HEARING DATES AND SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULES RE 48 Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint and 51 Motion to Quash to Dismiss.Opposition to 48 due by 12/3/2014 and Replies due by 12/10/2014. Opposition to 51 due by 12/12/2014 and Replies due by 12/19/2014. Motion Hearing set for 1/16/2015 09:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 2nd Floor, Oakland before Hon. Jeffrey S. White. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on November 19, 2014. (jswlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/19/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

ARCHIBALD CUNNINGHAM,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

No. C 14-03033 JSW

Plaintiff,

ORDER RESCHEDULING
HEARING DATES AND
EXTENDING BRIEFING
SCHEDULES

v.
MARIA SCHOPP, et al.,

13

Defendants.
/

14
15

On July 2, 2014, Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this case. (Docket No. 1.) On October

16

29, 2014, shortly before the deadline to serve the Defendants, set by Federal Rule of Civil

17

Procedure 4(m), expired, Plaintiff purportedly served a number of the defendants who had not

18

been served.

19

On November 4, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint,

20

which is set for a hearing date on December 19, 2014. The deadline to oppose that motion was

21

November 18, 2014. See N.D. Civ. L.R. 7-3(a). None of the named Defendants have opposed

22

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint, however it is not clear that the

23

Judicial Defendants have been served with that motion. Accordingly, the Court HEREBY

24

EXTENDS the deadline by which the Defendants may oppose that motion to December 3,

25

2014, and extends the deadline by which Plaintiff may file a reply to December 10, 2014. The

26

Court also CONTINUES the hearing on that motion from December 19, 2014 to January 16,

27

2015 at 9:00 a.m., for the reasons set forth below.

28

1

On November 18, 2014, the Judicial Defendants filed a motion to quash service and to

2

dismiss Plaintiff’s original complaint, which is noticed for hearing on January 23, 2015. The

3

Judicial Defendants’ motion exceeds the Court’s standing orders regarding page

4

limitations for motions by five pages. (See Standing Civil Orders ¶ 7.) Instead of striking

5

the motion as non-conforming, in the interests of moving this litigation forward, the Court will

6

grant Plaintiff an additional five pages to oppose Defendants’ motion. However, Defendants’

7

reply brief shall be limited to fifteen pages.

8
9

In light of the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday, the Court EXTENDS the briefing
schedule on that motion as follows: Plaintiffs’ opposition brief shall be due on December 12,
2014, and Defendants’ reply shall be due on December 19, 2014. The Court also ADVANCES

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

that hearing from January 23, 2015 to January 16, 2015, because January 23, 2015 is not an

12

available date for cases ending in terminal digits 1 and 2, and this case is related to a case

13

ending in terminal digit 2.

14
15
16
17

If the Court determines that either motion can be resolved on the papers, it shall notify
the parties in advance of the hearing date.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 19, 2014
JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2