Weiss v. City of Santa Rosa Police Department, 15-cv-01639-YGR. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180928c37
Visitors: 12
Filed: Sep. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER RE: OUTSTANDING MOTIONS YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . Pursuant to its prior Order re: Briefing on Outstanding Motions, the Court is in receipt of: (i) the City Defendants' "Reply Brief Pursuant to Order re: Briefing on Outstanding Motions [FRCP 56]" (Dkt. No. 168); and (ii) "Plaintiff's Objection to the City Motion for Partial or Summary Judgment and Questions" (Dkt. Nos. 172, 172-1). 1 In light of these filings, the Court deems briefing on the City Defendants' pending mo
Summary: ORDER RE: OUTSTANDING MOTIONS YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . Pursuant to its prior Order re: Briefing on Outstanding Motions, the Court is in receipt of: (i) the City Defendants' "Reply Brief Pursuant to Order re: Briefing on Outstanding Motions [FRCP 56]" (Dkt. No. 168); and (ii) "Plaintiff's Objection to the City Motion for Partial or Summary Judgment and Questions" (Dkt. Nos. 172, 172-1). 1 In light of these filings, the Court deems briefing on the City Defendants' pending mot..
More
ORDER RE: OUTSTANDING MOTIONS
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, District Judge.
Pursuant to its prior Order re: Briefing on Outstanding Motions, the Court is in receipt of: (i) the City Defendants' "Reply Brief Pursuant to Order re: Briefing on Outstanding Motions [FRCP 56]" (Dkt. No. 168); and (ii) "Plaintiff's Objection to the City Motion for Partial or Summary Judgment and Questions" (Dkt. Nos. 172, 172-1).1 In light of these filings, the Court deems briefing on the City Defendants' pending motions, (Dkt. Nos. 137, 145, 148), to be completed.
Accordingly, no further filings by either party will be permitted until the Court rules on the pending motions. Failure to comply with this Order will result in the striking of the filing.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Even though the Court's prior order provided that the "City Defendants shall be allowed to file a single reply to plaintiff's response, including the aforementioned update, within 14 days after her update is filed," the City Defendants filed their reply before plaintiff's updated response was filed. (Dkt. No. 164 (emphasis supplied).)
Source: Leagle
