IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 13, 2010
REX CHAPPELL, PLAINTIFF,
SAM BESS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
Defense counsel seeks clarification of the court's scheduling orders in this action. On September 14, 2010, at the parties' joint request, the court again extended deadlines for conducting discovery and filing dispositive motions. (Dkt. No. 159.) The court had previously required the parties to inform the court, by a date certain, whether they intended to file a dispositive motion (Dkt. No. 148), but did not repeat this requirement in its most recent scheduling order. The requirement had been imposed in an effort to expedite resolution of this nearly decade-old case. However, it now appears that the parties are equally motivated, and thus advance notice to the court will not be required.
Accordingly, no party need inform the court whether he or she intends to file a dispositive motion, but shall comply with the notice and briefing requirements and deadlines set forth in Local Rule 230. Upon review of the papers, the court will decide whether to convene the noticed hearing or decide the motion on the papers.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.