Ferris v. City of San Jose et al
Filing
25
ORDER vacating Order to Show Cause and Setting Motion to Dismiss Hearing. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 10/21/11. (lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/21/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
SAN JOSE DIVISION
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
12
SAM FERRIS,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF SAN JOSE, et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
15
16
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 11-cv-01752-LHK
ORDER VACATING ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE HEARING AND SETTING
MOTION TO DISMISS HEARING
After the Court issued the Order to Show Cause in this case, the Court received a copy of
17
Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant County of Santa Clara’s Motion to Dismiss and Defendant City
18
of San Jose’s Motion to Dismiss, which Plaintiff filed last night. Although Plaintiff’s oppositions
19
were due August 12, 2011, and August 19, 2011, respectively, the Court will consider Plaintiff’s
20
untimely filed opposition in light of his pro se status. Defendants shall have until November 4,
21
2011 to file their replies.
22
This Order moots the Order to Show Cause, and the Order to Show Cause hearing set for
23
November 16, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. is accordingly VACATED. The case management conference and
24
hearing on both motions to dismiss previously set for October 27, 2011 at 1:30 p.m. is hereby
25
continued to November 16, 2011, at 2:00 p.m.
26
IT IS SO ORDERED.
27
Dated: October 21, 2011
_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge
28
1
Case No.: 11-cv-01752-LHK
ORDER VACATING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING AND SETTING MOTION TO DISMISS HEARING
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?