Johnson v. Rose Village, 2:15-CV-02299-TLN-KJN. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20160304893
Visitors: 25
Filed: Mar. 03, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2016
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . On March 1, 2016, Defendants requested ten (10) days to file a reply to Plaintiff's Response to the Court's Order to Plaintiff to Show Cause Why the Court Should Not Dismiss Plaintiff's ADA claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendants filed their response on March 1, 2016. Based on good cause appearing and the Court's inherent power, the Court grants Defendants' request and may file their reply by no later than ten (10) days from the date
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . On March 1, 2016, Defendants requested ten (10) days to file a reply to Plaintiff's Response to the Court's Order to Plaintiff to Show Cause Why the Court Should Not Dismiss Plaintiff's ADA claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendants filed their response on March 1, 2016. Based on good cause appearing and the Court's inherent power, the Court grants Defendants' request and may file their reply by no later than ten (10) days from the date ..
More
ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
On March 1, 2016, Defendants requested ten (10) days to file a reply to Plaintiff's Response to the Court's Order to Plaintiff to Show Cause Why the Court Should Not Dismiss Plaintiff's ADA claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendants filed their response on March 1, 2016. Based on good cause appearing and the Court's inherent power, the Court grants Defendants' request and may file their reply by no later than ten (10) days from the date of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
