Villasenor v. Cate

Filing 13

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh granting 7 Motion for Extension of Time to File; finding as moot 9 Motion for Extension of Time to File (Attachments: # 1 certificate of mailing) (mpb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/18/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 FRANCISCO VILLASENOR, 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 MATTHEW CATE, 13 Defendant. 14 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C 11-3662 LHK (PR) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME; DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AS MOOT (Docket Nos. 7, 9) 15 Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 16 against Secretary Matthew Cate. Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion for an 17 extension of time to file a dispositive motion. Defendant’s motion is granted. His dispositive 18 motion is due no later than February 2, 2012. Plaintiff’s opposition is due thirty days 19 thereafter. Defendant must file his reply within fifteen days of the filing date of Plaintiff’s 20 opposition. 21 Plaintiff has requested a motion for extension of time to file formal discovery. However, 22 on January 9, 2012, the parties stipulated to staying discovery until the Court resolves 23 Defendant’s dispositive motion, which has not yet been filed. In light of the stipulation, 24 Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time is denied as moot. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 DATED: 27 1/18/12 LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge 28 Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time; Denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time as Moot G:\PRO-SE\SJ.LHK\CR.11\Villasenor662eot.wpd

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?