UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION
July 2, 2012
PAUL ANTHONY RUPE, PLAINTIFF,
M. CATE, SECRETARY OF CORRECTIONS, ET. AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Edward F. Shea Senior United States District Judge
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND
Before the Court, without oral argument, is Defendants Jackson and Williams Nunc Pro Tunc First Request for a Seventeen-Day Extension of Time to Respond to Second Amended Complaint, ECF No. 121, which the Court construes as a motion. Therein, defense counsel states that he inadvertently failed to realize that the waivers of service he executed for Defendants Jackson and Williams reflected a different date than that of Defendant Martinez's waiver of service. Defense counsel requests a seventeen-day extension of time so that he may file a single answer on behalf of the three recently-served Defendants, Defendants Jackson, Williams, and Martinez.
Having reviewed defense counsel's submission and the record in this matter, the Court finds good cause to extend the answer deadline for Defendants Jackson and Williams and grants their motion.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: Defendants Jackson and Williams' Nunc Pro Tunc First Request for a Seventeen-Day Extension of Time to Respond to Second Amended Complaint, ECF No. 121, is GRANTED. Defendants Jackson and Williams shall file their answer to the Second Amended Complaint no later than July 16, 2012.
IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Executive is directed to enter this Order and forward a copy to Mr. Rupe and defense counsel.
Edward F. Shea
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.