ORDER

KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

On March 7, 2016, defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. moved for summary judgment. ECF No. 16. It noticed a hearing for April 22, 2016. Id. Under the local rules of this District, an opposition was due on April 8, 2016. E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c). On April 5, 2016, Miriam Rodriguez filed a request to continue the hearing and opposition deadline under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). ECF No. 20. Wells Fargo opposed that motion. ECF No. 22. Ms. Rodriguez did not file an opposition to Wells Fargo's motion for summary judgment before the April 8, 2016 deadline passed.

On April 11, 2016, acting on its own motion, the court reset the hearing on Wells Fargo's motion for summary judgment for May 18, 2016. ECF No. 23. A few days later, on April 19, 2016, the court denied Ms. Rodriguez's request under Rule 56(d), but allowed her to submit a joint stipulation and proposed order after a further effort to meet and confer with counsel for Wells Fargo. ECF No. 24. Since then, Ms. Rodriguez has neither filed an opposition to the pending motion for summary judgment nor renewed her request under Rule 56(d). Wells Fargo now requests clarification whether the court's previous orders reset the date by which Ms. Rodriguez's opposition must be filed. ECF No. 25.

Wells Fargo's request is GRANTED. The court's minute order at ECF No. 23 did not retroactively reset the date by which Ms. Rodriguez's opposition was due. But she remains free to renew her request under Rule 56(d), as provided by the court's previous order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.