Bercilla et al v. Cal-Western Reconveyance LLC

Filing 18

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXTEND TIME by Magistrate Judge Paul Singh Grewal granting 17 . (psglc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/4/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12
13
14
15
16

ALFREDO A. BERCILLA et al.,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
CAL-WESTERN RECONVENYANCE, LLC, et )
al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

Case No. 5:14-cv-04263-PSG
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
EXTEND TIME
(Re: Docket No. 17)

After Defendants notified the court that Plaintiffs did not file any timely opposition to their

17
18

motion to dismiss,1 Plaintiffs request an enlargement of time to respond to Defendants’ motion.2

19

The court finds the motion to extend time suitable for disposition on the papers pursuant to the

20

local rules.3

21
22
23
24

1

See Docket No. 15 at 2.

25

2

See Docket No. 17.

26

3

27
28

See Civil L.R. 7-1(b) (“In the Judge’s discretion, or upon request by counsel and with the Judge’s
approval, a motion may be determined without oral argument or by telephone conference call”);
Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b) (“By rule or order, the court may provide for submitting and determining
motions on briefs, without oral hearings”).
1
Case No. 5:14-cv-04263-PSG
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXTEND TIME

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that “a court may, for good cause” extend the

1
2

time to file a response “on motion made after the time has expired if the party failed to act because

3

of excusable neglect.”4

4
5

With regard to their delay, Plaintiffs cite their pro per status, their lack of access to staff or
an attorney and complications with stress due to Defendants’ auctioning of their house.5

6

Having reviewed the arguments and circumstances, the court is satisfied that allowing

7
8
9

Plaintiffs a modest extension of time is fair and will not unduly prejudice Defendants. The court
GRANTS Plaintiffs an extension such that Plaintiffs may file a response no later than December

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

16, 2014. Replies are due by December 23, 2014. The hearing on the motion is rescheduled to

11

January 6, 2014 at 10:00 a.m.

12

SO ORDERED.

13

December 4, 2014

14
_________________________________
PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

4

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b).

28

5

See Docket No. 17 at 2.

2
Case No. 5:14-cv-04263-PSG
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXTEND TIME