UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 30, 2010
JAMES R. BRISCOE,
MARGARET MIMS, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER ADOPTING STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(ECF No. 102)
Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment Due 1/3/2011
Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on October 13, 2010 and set the Motion for a hearing on December 17, 2010. (ECF No. 98.) By local rule, Plaintiff's opposition to the pending Motion, if any, was due fourteen days before the hearing, December 3, 2010. L.R. 230(c). Before the Court is the parties' Stipulation and Agreement for an Extension of Time to Respond in which the parties agree to allow Plaintiff an additional thirty days to respond to the Motion to Dismiss based on the health of Plaintiff's counsel. (ECF No. 102.)
For good cause shown, the Court ADOPTS the parties' Stipulation and Agreement. Plaintiff's opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment shall be filed not later than January 3, 2011. In light of the extended briefing schedule, the December 17, 2010 hearing is VACATED and will be reset by the Court, if necessary, after the Motion is fully briefed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.