East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump, 18-cv-06810-JST. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20181129a94
Visitors: 17
Filed: Nov. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART EMERGENCY MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME Re: ECF No. 53 JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . The Court issued a temporary restraining order on November 19, 2018. ECF No. 43. Today — eight days later — Defendants filed a notice of appeal, ECF No. 51, and an emergency motion for a stay pending appeal, ECF No. 52. Defendants request that the Court rule on their motion for a stay within one day, without giving Plaintiffs an opportunity to respond. ECF No. 53 at 2. Given that Defenda
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART EMERGENCY MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME Re: ECF No. 53 JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . The Court issued a temporary restraining order on November 19, 2018. ECF No. 43. Today — eight days later — Defendants filed a notice of appeal, ECF No. 51, and an emergency motion for a stay pending appeal, ECF No. 52. Defendants request that the Court rule on their motion for a stay within one day, without giving Plaintiffs an opportunity to respond. ECF No. 53 at 2. Given that Defendan..
More
ORDER GRANTING IN PART EMERGENCY MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME
Re: ECF No. 53
JON S. TIGAR, District Judge.
The Court issued a temporary restraining order on November 19, 2018. ECF No. 43. Today — eight days later — Defendants filed a notice of appeal, ECF No. 51, and an emergency motion for a stay pending appeal, ECF No. 52. Defendants request that the Court rule on their motion for a stay within one day, without giving Plaintiffs an opportunity to respond. ECF No. 53 at 2.
Given that Defendants waited eight days to file their motion for a stay, the Court cannot reasonably conclude that the issues presented require resolution within one day and without an opportunity for the opposing parties to be heard. Nonetheless, recognizing the time-sensitive nature of this case, the Court GRANTS IN PART the motion to shorten time.
Plaintiffs shall file their opposition to the motion for a stay by November 29, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. There will be no reply. The Court will rule on the motion by the end of November 30, 2018.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
