The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richard Seeborg United States District Judge
ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR FILING OPPOSITION TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND CONTINUING HEARING
On November 17, 2011, the parties in the above-captioned action filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and a hearing was scheduled for December 22, 2011. (Dkt. No. 98). 19
Accordingly, the parties' opposition briefs were to be due by December 1, 2011. However, the 20 parties have also been engaged in an ongoing discovery dispute, which was resolved on November 21 21, 2011, by order of the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case. (Dkt. No. 105). In relevant part, 22 that order required defendants to produce tax records that shed light on their finances by December 9, 2011 -- eight days after the opposition briefs were to be due. Although plaintiff contends that the 24 central issue raised by defendants' motion is whether defendants have sufficient financial resources 25 to render remediation of the restaurant "readily achievable," defendants' counsel has declined to 26 stipulate to an extension of time to permit plaintiffs' counsel to review the records to be produced. 27
Accordingly, on November 23, 2011, plaintiff filed an administrative motion to extend the date by 28 which he must respond to defendants' motion for summary judgment. Without defendants' financial records, plaintiff cannot adequately address defendants' motion for summary judgment. 2
Accordingly, the motion for an extension of time is granted.
The parties are hereby instructed to file opposition briefs to each other's cross-motions by December 16, 2011; reply briefs shall be filed by December 23, 2011. The hearing on the parties' 5 cross-motions, previously scheduled for December 22, 2011, is hereby continued to 1:30 p.m. on December 29, 2011, in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco. 7
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...