Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Randolph M. Diaz v. M. Martel

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 24, 2012

RANDOLPH M. DIAZ, PLAINTIFF,
v.
M. MARTEL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

By notice filed July 19, 2012 (Dkt. No. 25), and pursuant to Woods v. Carey, __F.3d __, 2012 WL 2626912 (9th Cir., July 06, 2012 ), defendants have again informed plaintiff of the requirements for opposing defendants' pending motion to dismiss, filed on April 2, 2012. (See Dkt. No. 25 at 2; see also Dkt. No. 22 at 1-2.) Defendants also request, on behalf of plaintiff, an extension of time within which plaintiff must file and serve his opposition to the pending motion.

For good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant's request (Dkt. No. 25), to accord plaintiff an extension of time within which to file and serve an opposition to defendants' pending motion to dismiss, is granted;

2. Plaintiff shall file and serve an opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss within twenty-eight (28) days after the filing date of this order;

3. Defendants may file and serve a reply to plaintiff's opposition within fourteen

(14) days after service of plaintiff's opposition; and

4. This court's order filed June 20, 2012 (Dkt. No. 24), requiring that plaintiff file his opposition within thirty days, is vacated.

SO ORDERED.

20120724

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.