DEFENDANT USA'S UNOPPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE REPLY

EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Civil L. R. 7-11, defendant USA hereby requests the Court to extend by just two days the time for it to file its reply in support of its motion to dismiss plaintiff's amended complaint to and including April 3, 2014. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

Per Court Order, plaintiff's opposition to defendants' pending motions to dismiss was due March 25, 2014; defendant USA's reply is due on April 1, 2014; and defendant City and County of San Francisco's reply is due April 3, 2014. Document 93. Plaintiff filed his opposition on March 25, 2014. However, defendant USA did not receive it until the afternoon of March 27, 2014, when it appeared on PACER.

Plaintiff's opposition to defendant USA's motion to dismiss is seventeen pages of text, not including thirty-four pages of exhibits. Documents 95 and 96. Defense counsel will be on annual leave on March 28, 2014. Although plaintiff's arguments lack merit, defendant USA would like the full seven days contemplated by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this Court's Local Rules to prepare a reply. Thus, defendant USA would like to file its reply on or before April 3, 2014, which is the same day that co-defendant City and County of San Francisco will file its reply per the Court's briefing schedule. This should not delay the April 18, 2014, hearing date on the pending motions to dismiss.

In a telephone conversation on March 27, 2014, plaintiff told the undersigned that he did not oppose this request.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Good cause appearing, and pursuant to the agreement of the parties, the date by which defendant USA must file its reply in support of its motion to dismiss plaintiff's amended complaint is continued from April 1, 2014, to April 3, 2014.

SO ORDERED.