IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 6, 2012
IGOR CHEPEL, PLAINTIFF,
JUDGE JAMES MIZE OF THE SACRAMENTO SUPERIOR COURT; IRENA CHEPEL; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 20, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
A hearing on defendants' respective motions seeking the dismissal of plaintiff's claims is presently set for June 7, 2012, and those motions are fully briefed.*fn1 However, on June 4, 2012, plaintiff filed an ex parte request to continue the hearing for three weeks on the grounds that his ongoing heart problems recently flared up, and that plaintiff's physician has advised him not to engage in stressful activity (Dkt. No. 22).*fn2 In light of the fact that the motions are fully briefed and that defendants would not suffer any apparent prejudice by the court's relatively brief continuance of the hearing date, the undersigned grants plaintiff's request.
However, no party should view this continuance as an opportunity to further brief the fully-briefed, pending motions. Absent an extraordinary showing of good cause, the undersigned will summarily strike or disregard any filings attempting to further brief the motions.
Additionally, plaintiff represents that he has been advised generally to avoid "highly stressful situations" and that "the Judicial process always increases the plaintiff's stress level." In light of these representations, plaintiff is cautioned that if he seeks a continuance of the new hearing date, the court may simply submit the motions and resolve them without a hearing. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); E. Dist. Local Rule 230(g).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the June 7, 2012 hearing on the defendants's motions to dismiss or specially strike plaintiff's claims is continued to Thursday, June 28, 2012, at 10:00 a.m.*fn3
IT IS SO ORDERED.