IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 30, 2009
WILLIE BAILEY, III, PLAINTIFF,
J. WEDELL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 27, 2009, defendants requested an extension of time to file and serve reply briefs to plaintiff's oppositions to defendants' motions for summary judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). Counsel for defendants "anticipated that [he] could prepare and file" the reply briefs on or before April 30, 2009. Defs.' Mar. 27, 2009 Req., Decl. of John M. Feser ¶ 5. Accordingly, on April 14, 2009, the court granted defendants' request and directed defendants to file their reply briefs by April 30, 2009. On April 28, 2009, two days before the reply briefs were due, defendants requested an additional 45 days to file their reply briefs. That request, in its entirety, reads as follows:
Defense counsel explains that this action was reassigned to him on April 27, 2009 and that "[a] reply brief to each of plaintiff's oppositions is apparently due no later than Thursday, April 30, 2009. The undersigned has no knowledge of the facts of this case and cannot possibly file a reply by April 30th."
In order to give the undersigned time to review all pleadings and discovery, as well as handle all other previously scheduled work, the undersigned requests a forty-five (45) day extension of time to file reply briefs, to the extent they are necessary. This request applies to the three Motions for Summary Judgment, on behalf of each defendant.
Defs.' Apr. 28, 2009 Request.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, should defendants decide that reply briefs are necessary, they shall file a single reply brief addressing each of plaintiff's oppositions to defendants' motions for summary judgment within 7 days from the date this order is filed.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.