Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

CAMPOS v. CITY OF ESCONDIDO, 14-cv-00081-BAS(NLS). (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160111600 Visitors: 19
Filed: Jan. 08, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 08, 2016
Summary: ORDER: (1) GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE RESPONSE DATE (ECF NO. 32);AND (2) DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER PERMITTING FILING OF A JOINT STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS (ECF NO. 34) CYNTHIA BASHANT , District Judge . Presently before the Court are two ex parte motions concerning Defendants' motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, partial summary judgment. On December 15, 2015, Plaintiffs filed an ex par
More

ORDER:

(1) GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE RESPONSE DATE (ECF NO. 32);AND

(2) DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER PERMITTING FILING OF A JOINT STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS (ECF NO. 34)

Presently before the Court are two ex parte motions concerning Defendants' motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, partial summary judgment. On December 15, 2015, Plaintiffs filed an ex parte motion requesting a three week extension of time to file an opposition to the motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 32.) Defendants oppose. (ECF No. 33.) On January 5, 2016, Defendants filed an ex parte motion seeking leave to file a Joint Statement of Undisputed Facts. (ECF No. 34.) No opposition was filed.

Having read and considered the moving papers, and good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS IN PART Plaintiffs' ex parte motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 32). Accordingly, Plaintiffs' opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, partial summary judgment is due no later than January 18, 2016, and Defendants' reply is due no later than January 25, 2016. Thereafter, the Court will decide the motion on the papers submitted and without oral argument, unless the parties are notified otherwise. See Civ. L.R. 7.1(d)(1).

The Court further DENIES AS MOOT Defendants' ex parte motion seeking leave to file a Joint Statement of Undisputed Facts (ECF No. 34). While the Court's Chambers Rules require leave of Court to file a "Separate" Statement of Fact, the parties are required to file a "Joint" Statement of Undisputed Material Facts "no later than the reply brief." (See Judge Bashant's Chambers' Rules at ¶ 4(F).) To the extent Defendants are seeking to file a "Separate" Statement of Fact, that request is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer