Schmidt v. Jaime, 18-cv-06495-YGR (PR). (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190626993
Visitors: 13
Filed: Jun. 25, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 25, 2019
Summary: ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PETITIONER TO FILE OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . Before the Court is a motion filed by Petitioner on June 3, 2019, in which he "move[s] for a motion to continue despite [the] court[`]s unprejudicial dismissal for untimeliness." Dkt. 10 at 1. The Court notes that the instant action has not been dismissed, and instead Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss. See Dkt. 7. While not entirely clear, it
Summary: ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PETITIONER TO FILE OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . Before the Court is a motion filed by Petitioner on June 3, 2019, in which he "move[s] for a motion to continue despite [the] court[`]s unprejudicial dismissal for untimeliness." Dkt. 10 at 1. The Court notes that the instant action has not been dismissed, and instead Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss. See Dkt. 7. While not entirely clear, it ..
More
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PETITIONER TO FILE OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, District Judge.
Before the Court is a motion filed by Petitioner on June 3, 2019, in which he "move[s] for a motion to continue despite [the] court[`]s unprejudicial dismissal for untimeliness." Dkt. 10 at 1. The Court notes that the instant action has not been dismissed, and instead Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss. See Dkt. 7. While not entirely clear, it seems that Petitioner is requesting an extension of time to file his opposition to the pending motion to dismiss. Therefore, the Court construes his motion to be a request for an extension of time to file his opposition.
Having read and considered Petitioner's request, and good cause appearing,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's request for an extension of time is GRANTED. Dkt. 10. The time in which Petitioner may file his opposition to Respondent's motion to dismiss will be extended up to and including twenty-eight (28) days from the date of this Order.
Respondent shall file a reply brief no later than fourteen (14) days after the date Petitioner's opposition is filed.
This Order terminates Docket No. 10.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
