Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Smith v. Wackenhut Corp.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 4, 2009

MARVIN SMITH, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WACKENHUT CORPORATION, DEFENDANT.

ORDER

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action, which was referred to the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule ("Local Rule") 72-302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On July 22, 2009, defendant filed an amended motion to dismiss, and noticed the matter for hearing on September 16, 2009, before the undersigned. Dckt. No. 19. On September 2, 2009, plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a late opposition, Dckt. No. 22, and a document entitled "Plaintiff['s] opposition of motion to dismiss for improper venue, and plaintiff['s] notice of motion to establish admissions to particular allegations in plaintiff's second amended complaint," Dckt. No. 23.

It is unclear whether plaintiff's request to file a late opposition seeks leave to file a further opposition or whether the request simply seeks permission to file the September 2, 2009 "opposition [and] notice of motion" on that date, as plaintiff did. However, because the September 2, 2009 "opposition [and] notice of motion" were timely filed on September 2, 2009, and because the September 2, 2009 "opposition [and] notice of motion" do not address defendant's arguments in its amended motion to dismiss regarding improper venue, plaintiff's request to file a late opposition is construed as a request to file a further opposition to defendant's amended motion to dismiss, and is granted.

In light of that extension, and in light of the motion that plaintiff filed on September 2, 2009, the hearing date of September 16, 2009 on defendant's amended motion to dismiss and plaintiff's September 2, 2009 motion is continued to September 30, 2009, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 25. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 78-230(e) ("Any counter-motion or other motion that a party may desire to make that is related to the general subject matter of the original motion shall be served and filed with the Clerk in the manner and on the date prescribed for the filing of opposition. In the event [such a] motion is filed, the Court may continue the hearing on the original and all related motions so as to give all parties reasonable opportunity to serve and file oppositions and replies to all pending motions.")

Accordingly, good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The hearing date of September 16, 2009 is continued to September 30, 2009, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom No. 25; 2. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a late opposition, Dckt. No. 22, is granted; 3. On or before September 9, 2009, plaintiff may file a further opposition to defendant's amended motion to dismiss;

4. On or before September 16, 2009, defendant shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to plaintiff's September 2, 2009 motion, and may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition to its amended motion to dismiss; and,

5. On or before September 23, 2009, plaintiff may file a reply to any opposition defendant files to plaintiff's September 2, 2009 motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20090904

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.