Boyd v. Santa Cruz County et al

Filing 84

ORDER GRANTING 82 PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO EFFECT SERVICE OF PROCESS; GRANTING 82 PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR A CONTINUANCE OF THE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; GRANTING 82 PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; AND CLARIFYING THAT PLAINTIFF MAY NOT ADD ADDITIONAL PARTIES OR CLAIMS WITHOUT EXPRESS LEAVE OF COURT. Further Case Management Conference set for 1/21/2016 11:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 5th Floor, San Jose. (blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2015)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

MICHAEL BOYD,

Case No. 15-cv-00405-BLF

Plaintiff,
8
v.

15

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF
TIME TO EFFECT SERVICE OF
PROCESS; GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR A CONTINUANCE OF
THE CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE; GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR AN
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT;
AND CLARIFYING THAT PLAINTIFF
MAY NOT ADD ADDITIONAL
PARTIES OR CLAIMS WITHOUT
EXPRESS LEAVE OF COURT

16

[Re: ECF 82]

9
10

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

17
18
19
20

On October 22, 2015, Plaintiff filed a document requesting: (1) a 120-day extension of

21

time to effect service of process; (2) a continuance of the Case Management Conference from

22

November 12, 2015 to January 21, 2016; and (3) a two-week extension of the deadline for filing a

23

second amended complaint.

24

Plaintiff’s requests are GRANTED as follows:

25

(1)

26
27
28

Plaintiff is GRANTED an extension of time to effect service of process until
February 25, 2016;

(2)

The Case Management Conference set for November 12, 2015 is CONTINUED to
January 21, 2015 at 11:00 a.m.; and

1

(3)

The deadline for filing a second amended complaint is EXTENDED to November

2

18, 2015. With respect to Plaintiff’s statement that he wishes to dismiss Jason

3

Matthys from this case, Plaintiff may do so by omitting Jason Matthys from the

4

amended pleading. With respect to Plaintiff’s statement that he anticipates adding

5

additional plaintiffs and defendants in this case, the Court hereby CLARIFIES that

6

Plaintiff was granted leave to amend only as to those claims and parties alleged in

7

the first amended complaint. Plaintiff may MAY NOT ADD additional claims or

8

parties without express leave of the Court.

9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Dated: October 26, 2015
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2