Barrett v. Berry, 19-cv-01923-HSG. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20191106b07
Visitors: 18
Filed: Nov. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 05, 2019
Summary: ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO CHANGE DEADLINE FOR REPLYING TO MOTIONS TO CHANGE TIME; DENYING AS MOOT REQUEST TO CHANGE BRIEFING SCHEDULE Re: Dkt. Nos. 27, 28 HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . Now pending before the Court are plaintiff's requests that (1) the Court allow plaintiff ten (10) days to respond to any motions to change time (Dkt. No. 27), and (2) that the court deny defendants' request for an extension of time to file their dispositive motion, Dkt. No. 23, to the extent tha
Summary: ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO CHANGE DEADLINE FOR REPLYING TO MOTIONS TO CHANGE TIME; DENYING AS MOOT REQUEST TO CHANGE BRIEFING SCHEDULE Re: Dkt. Nos. 27, 28 HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . Now pending before the Court are plaintiff's requests that (1) the Court allow plaintiff ten (10) days to respond to any motions to change time (Dkt. No. 27), and (2) that the court deny defendants' request for an extension of time to file their dispositive motion, Dkt. No. 23, to the extent that..
More
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO CHANGE DEADLINE FOR REPLYING TO MOTIONS TO CHANGE TIME; DENYING AS MOOT REQUEST TO CHANGE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
Re: Dkt. Nos. 27, 28
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR., District Judge.
Now pending before the Court are plaintiff's requests that (1) the Court allow plaintiff ten (10) days to respond to any motions to change time (Dkt. No. 27), and (2) that the court deny defendants' request for an extension of time to file their dispositive motion, Dkt. No. 23, to the extent that the request shortens plaintiff's time to respond to any dispositive motion from forty-five days to thirty days (Dkt. No. 28). The Court construes the latter request as requesting a change in the briefing schedule because the Court has already granted defendants an extension of time to file their dispositive motion, Dkt. No. 26.
Good cause being shown, the Court GRANTS plaintiff's request that the Court allow plaintiff ten (10) days to respond to any motions to change time. The Court DENIES as moot plaintiff's request for a change in the briefing schedule because the revised briefing schedule allows plaintiff forty-five (45) days to file his opposition to any dispositive motion. See Dkt. No. 26. Should plaintiff find that he requires more than forty-five days to prepare his opposition, he may file a motion requesting an extension of time to file his opposition.
This order terminates Dkt. Nos. 27 and 28.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
