Agostino v. City of Cape Coral et al

Filing 15

ORDER granting 12 Plaintiff's Motion for Extension. Plaintiff shall have up to and including April 11, 2017 to respond to the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10 ). Signed by Magistrate Judge Carol Mirando on 3/29/2017. (HJ)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION JOSEPH D. AGOSTINO, Plaintiff, v. Case No: 2:17-cv-135-FtM-99CM CITY OF CAPE CORAL, CODE ENFORCEMENT CITY OF CAPE CORAL, MARINA SAWICKI, SUZANNE NAUGHTON, RICHARD LEON, CAROL RALL and HAROLD S. ESKIN, Defendants. ORDER This matter comes before the Court upon review of Plaintiff's Motion for Extension (Doc. 12) filed on March 24, 2017. On March 6, 2017, Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, filed a Complaint against Defendants. Doc. 1. On March 16, 2017, Defendant City of Cape Coral filed a Motion to Dismiss on the grounds that the Complaint is not sufficient, was not properly served, and fails to state a claim upon which relief can be grated. is due March 30, 2017. Doc. 10. Plaintiff’s response to the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff seeks to extend the deadline for his response by twelve (12) days because of his illness. 1 Doc. 12. Because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and shows good cause, the Court will grant the requested relief. Although Plaintiff does not explicitly state what deadline he is seeking to extend, it appears that he is seeking to extend the deadline for his response to the Motion to Dismiss. Doc. 10. 1 The Court reminds Plaintiff, however, that Plaintiff’s motions must comply with Local Rule 3.01(g). Local Rule 3.01(g) requires that each motion filed in a civil case, with certain enumerated exceptions not at issue here, contain a statement “stating whether counsel agree on the resolution of the motion,” and further provides that a statement to the effect that counsel for the moving party attempted to confer with counsel for the opposing party but counsel was unavailable is “insufficient to satisfy the parties’ obligation to confer.” M.D. Fla. R. 3.01(g). ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff's Motion for Extension (Doc. 12) is GRANTED. 2. Plaintiff shall have up to and including April 11, 2017 to respond to the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10). DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on this 29th day of March, 2017. Copies: Counsel of record Joseph D. Agostino pro se -2-

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?