Shaw v. Brazell, 19-cv-08103-SVK. (2020)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20200212704
Visitors: 28
Filed: Feb. 11, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 11, 2020
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE Re: Dkt. No. 11. SUSAN VAN KEULEN , Magistrate Judge . On February 10, 2020, Plaintiff Cecil Eugene Shaw ("Plaintiff") filed a motion requesting a sixty-day extension to complete service on Defendants Richard L. Brazell and Joan K. Brazell (collectively, "Brazell Defendants"). Dkt. 11 at 2. Plaintiff also requests an additional sixty days by which to complete the joint site inspection as required by General Order 56. Id. In support of
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE Re: Dkt. No. 11. SUSAN VAN KEULEN , Magistrate Judge . On February 10, 2020, Plaintiff Cecil Eugene Shaw ("Plaintiff") filed a motion requesting a sixty-day extension to complete service on Defendants Richard L. Brazell and Joan K. Brazell (collectively, "Brazell Defendants"). Dkt. 11 at 2. Plaintiff also requests an additional sixty days by which to complete the joint site inspection as required by General Order 56. Id. In support of t..
More
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE
Re: Dkt. No. 11.
SUSAN VAN KEULEN, Magistrate Judge.
On February 10, 2020, Plaintiff Cecil Eugene Shaw ("Plaintiff") filed a motion requesting a sixty-day extension to complete service on Defendants Richard L. Brazell and Joan K. Brazell (collectively, "Brazell Defendants"). Dkt. 11 at 2. Plaintiff also requests an additional sixty days by which to complete the joint site inspection as required by General Order 56. Id. In support of the motion, Plaintiff's counsel states, under oath, that no defendants have appeared. Dkt. 11-1 ¶ 12. A review of the docket demonstrates that this statement is in error, as Defendant RJC Spirits has filed an answer to Plaintiff's complaint. See Dkt. 10. Plaintiff's counsel is cautioned, as it has been in other matters, to check the facts before making statements under oath to this Court.
Regarding the requests for extensions, Plaintiff asserts that "due to the discovery of new information, Plaintiff anticipates that service upon Defendants can be completed within shortly." Dkt. 11 at 2. As thirty days should be sufficient, the Court GRANTS a thirty-day extension for Plaintiff to complete service on the Brazell Defendants. Service must be completed by March 12, 2020.
The Court also grants a thirty-day extension to the deadline to complete the joint-site inspection.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
