Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL v. McCARTHY, 16-cv-02184-JST. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160921788 Visitors: 18
Filed: Sep. 20, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 20, 2016
Summary: ORDER Re: ECF No. 55 JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . The Court has received Defendants' stipulated request for a two-day extension of time to file their reply brief in support of their motion to dismiss. ECF No. 55. Defendants base their request on the government's desire to spend two additional days completing its internal review of its brief. The government's internal review process is not a new or unanticipated event. Also, the request was filed on the day the reply brief was due, leavi
More

ORDER

Re: ECF No. 55

The Court has received Defendants' stipulated request for a two-day extension of time to file their reply brief in support of their motion to dismiss. ECF No. 55. Defendants base their request on the government's desire to spend two additional days completing its internal review of its brief. The government's internal review process is not a new or unanticipated event. Also, the request was filed on the day the reply brief was due, leaving no time for the Court to consider the request and still require that the brief be timely filed.

Nonetheless, the Court grants the request. Future requests for enlargement of time that either fail to state good cause or leave insufficient time for the Court's review will likely be denied, even if the requests are the subject of a stipulation.

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