Ortiz v. Client Services, Inc., 2:18-cv-02396-KJM-AC. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20181213a62
Visitors: 12
Filed: Dec. 12, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 12, 2018
Summary: ORDER ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . The court is in receipt of plaintiffs' motion for "postponement of all proceedings." ECF No. 16. Plaintiffs note that there is only one pending matter, which is on calendar for hearing on December 19, 2019. Id. at 2. Plaintiffs ask for at least a 60-day postponement of this hearing due to the sudden illness of an out-of-state family member. Id. at 1. The motion at issue, an amended motion to dismiss, has been pending since September 6, 2018. EC
Summary: ORDER ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . The court is in receipt of plaintiffs' motion for "postponement of all proceedings." ECF No. 16. Plaintiffs note that there is only one pending matter, which is on calendar for hearing on December 19, 2019. Id. at 2. Plaintiffs ask for at least a 60-day postponement of this hearing due to the sudden illness of an out-of-state family member. Id. at 1. The motion at issue, an amended motion to dismiss, has been pending since September 6, 2018. ECF..
More
ORDER
ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.
The court is in receipt of plaintiffs' motion for "postponement of all proceedings." ECF No. 16. Plaintiffs note that there is only one pending matter, which is on calendar for hearing on December 19, 2019. Id. at 2. Plaintiffs ask for at least a 60-day postponement of this hearing due to the sudden illness of an out-of-state family member. Id. at 1. The motion at issue, an amended motion to dismiss, has been pending since September 6, 2018. ECF No. 8. Plaintiffs have already been granted one extension of time in relation to this motion, ECF No. 11, and have filed oppositions, ECF Nos. 14, 15.
Upon considering plaintiffs' request and good cause appearing, the court will GRANT plaintiffs' motion for an extension and re-set the hearing on the motion to dismiss. However, the court will approve no further delays. Should plaintiffs be unable to appear for the rescheduled hearing on the motion to dismiss, the motion will be ordered submitted for decision on the basis of the briefs and record of the case, without oral argument, as provided in Local Rule 230(g).
Accordingly, the court hereby ORDERS:
1. Plaintiffs' motion for postponement (ECF No. 16) is construed as a motion to continue hearing on defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8), and is GRANTED;
2. The December 12, 2018 hearing on the motion at ECF No. 8 is RE-SET to February 20, 2019 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 26(AC) before Magistrate Judge Allison Claire;
3. Defendant's reply to the opposition, if any, is due February 13, 2019.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
