WELENCO, INC. v. CORBELL, 2:13-cv-0287 KJM CKD. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20150302682
Visitors: 10
Filed: Feb. 27, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 27, 2015
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY , Magistrate Judge . On February 26, 2015, attorney Thomas Cregger filed a proposed substitution of attorneys 1 to substitute in as counsel for both plaintiffs. The same day, attorney Cregger, although the proposed substitution has not yet been allowed by the District Court, filed an ex parte application on behalf of plaintiffs to request additional time to oppose the pending motion for sanctions in which defendants seek terminating sanctions against plaintiffs f
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY , Magistrate Judge . On February 26, 2015, attorney Thomas Cregger filed a proposed substitution of attorneys 1 to substitute in as counsel for both plaintiffs. The same day, attorney Cregger, although the proposed substitution has not yet been allowed by the District Court, filed an ex parte application on behalf of plaintiffs to request additional time to oppose the pending motion for sanctions in which defendants seek terminating sanctions against plaintiffs fo..
More
ORDER
CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.
On February 26, 2015, attorney Thomas Cregger filed a proposed substitution of attorneys1 to substitute in as counsel for both plaintiffs. The same day, attorney Cregger, although the proposed substitution has not yet been allowed by the District Court, filed an ex parte application on behalf of plaintiffs to request additional time to oppose the pending motion for sanctions in which defendants seek terminating sanctions against plaintiffs for their failure to comply with the court's order directing them to respond to discovery. Plaintiffs also seek continuance of the hearing on the motion. The amount of time plaintiffs seek to oppose the motion is excessive and impractical under the court's scheduling order.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiffs are granted an extension of time to March 4, 2015 to file opposition to the motion for sanctions.
2. Reply, if any, shall be filed no later than March 6, 2015.
3. The motion for sanctions remains calendared for hearing on March 11, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. in courtroom no. 24.
FootNotes
1. In a separate affidavit, counsel states that the proposed substitution of attorneys is only "conditional."
Source: Leagle
