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)

Download PDF
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?