Rodriguez v. Barrita, Inc. et al

Filing 109

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR FILING OPPOSITION TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND CONTINUING HEARING. Motion Hearing set for 12/29/2011 01:30 PM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg.Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/28/11. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/28/2011)

*E-Filed 11/28/11*

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

9
ARMANDO RODRIGUEZ,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

No. C 09-04057 RS

Plaintiff,
v.

13

BARRITA, INC., et al.,

14

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR
FILING OPPOSITION TO SUMMARY
JUDGMENT MOTION AND
CONTINUING HEARING

Defendants.
____________________________________/

15
16
17

On November 17, 2011, the parties in the above-captioned action filed cross-motions for

18

summary judgment, and a hearing was scheduled for December 22, 2011. (Dkt. No. 98).

19

Accordingly, the parties’ opposition briefs were to be due by December 1, 2011. However, the

20

parties have also been engaged in an ongoing discovery dispute, which was resolved on November

21

21, 2011, by order of the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case. (Dkt. No. 105). In relevant part,

22

that order required defendants to produce tax records that shed light on their finances by December

23

9, 2011 – eight days after the opposition briefs were to be due. Although plaintiff contends that the

24

central issue raised by defendants’ motion is whether defendants have sufficient financial resources

25

to render remediation of the restaurant “readily achievable,” defendants’ counsel has declined to

26

stipulate to an extension of time to permit plaintiffs’ counsel to review the records to be produced.

27

Accordingly, on November 23, 2011, plaintiff filed an administrative motion to extend the date by

28

which he must respond to defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Without defendants’
NO. C 09-04057 RS
ORDER

1

financial records, plaintiff cannot adequately address defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

2

Accordingly, the motion for an extension of time is granted.

3

The parties are hereby instructed to file opposition briefs to each other’s cross-motions by

4

December 16, 2011; reply briefs shall be filed by December 23, 2011. The hearing on the parties’

5

cross-motions, previously scheduled for December 22, 2011, is hereby continued to 1:30 p.m. on

6

December 29, 2011, in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Dated: 11/28/11
RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NO. C 09-04057 RS
ORDER

2