IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 12, 2011
GREGORY SMITH, PLAINTIFF,
PEETRANJAN SAHOTA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
On October 1, 2010, defendants filed a motion for an extension of time in which to respond to the complaint and on November 18, 2010, filed a motion to dismiss. They filed another motion to dismiss on December 15, 2010; and on December 23, 2010, defendants filed a motion for an extension of time, nunc pro tunc, to file the motion and serve it on plaintiff's new address.
In the meantime, plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time in which to oppose the first motion to dismiss, but then timely filed his opposition. In addition, he has filed a motion for a clarification.
1. Defendants' motions for extensions of time (doc. nos. 24 & 35) are granted; and the motions to dismiss (doc no. 30) are deemed timely.
2. Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time (doc. no. 27) and motion for clarification (doc. no. 36) are granted; plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss filed December 15, 2010. Defendants' reply is due within fourteen days of the date the opposition is filed.
3. Because Docket Nos. 26 and 30 are the same, Docket No. 26 is denied.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.