Burrell et al v. County of Santa Clara et al
Filing
46
ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh denying 42 Ex Parte Application (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
SAN JOSE DIVISION
10
ALMA BURRELL, VICKYE HAYTER,
MARGARET HEADD
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
11
Plaintiffs,
12
13
14
v.
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, DAN
PEDDYCORD, RAE WEDEL, MARTY
FENSTERSHEIB AND DOES 1 THROUGH
50, INCLUSIVE,
15
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 11-CV-04569-LHK
ORDER RE: REQUESTED SCHEDULE
CHANGE
16
17
Plaintiffs have filed an ex parte application to extend time to file oppositions to defendants’
18
motion for summary judgment and motion to sever. ECF No. 42. Defendants filed an opposition.
19
ECF No. 45.
20
The Court notes that it has already granted the parties one set of extensions on their
21
discovery deadlines. See ECF No. 30. Plaintiffs have provided no reason, beyond the volume of
22
work involved in opposing the motions, why an extension is now appropriate. Moreover,
23
extending the briefing deadlines would require a new hearing date, which the Court’s schedule
24
cannot accommodate, and which would interfere with preparation for the April 29, 2013 trial.
25
Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion to extend time to file oppositions is DENIED.
26
IT IS SO ORDERED.
27
Dated: February 5, 2012
28
Case No.: 11-CV-04569-LHK
ORDER RE: REQUESTED SCHEDULE CHANGE
_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge
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?