Packnett v. Alvarez et al

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-01229

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS A SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A DISPOSITIVE MOTION; RESPONDING TO REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION ON STATUS OF DEFENDANTS DAVIS AND HAY; AND GRANTING MOTION FOR JOINDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting {{40}} Motion for Extension of Time to File; granting {{44}} Motion.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 KENNETH JEROME PACKNETT, 7 Case No. 15-cv-01229-YGR (PR) Plaintiff, 8 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS A v. SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME TO 9 FILE A DISPOSITIVE MOTION; FERNAND ALVAREZ, et al., RESPONDING TO REQUEST FOR 10 CLARIFICATION ON STATUS OF Defendants. DEFENDANTS DAVIS AND HAY; AND 11 GRANTING MOTION FOR JOINDER 12 Before the Court are Defendants' motions for another extension of time to file their Northern District of California United States District Court 13 dispositive motion. Dkts. 34, 40. Also before the Court is Defendants' "Request for Clarification 14 and Status of Davis and Hay; Notice of Joinder in Motion for Extension of Time to File a 15 Dispositive Motion," in which Defendants' attorney points out that served Defendants M. L. Davis 16 and S. Hay were inadvertently terminated from this action. Dkt. 44 at 1-2. Defendants request for 17 the Court to clarify whether or not these Defendants have been terminated, and, if not, whether 18 they may join in the motion for an extension of time to file a dispositive motion. Id. at 2. 19 After a review of the docket, the Court finds that Defendants Davis and Hay were 20 incorrectly terminated, and it has instructed the Clerk of the Court to delete the notification of their 21 termination on the docket. As mentioned above, Defendants Davis and Hay filed a motion to join 22 the aforementioned Defendants' motion for extension of time. Dkt. 44. Defendants Davis's and 23 Hay's motion is GRANTED, and the joinder is accepted. 24 Also, for good cause appearing, Defendants' request for an extension of time to file a 25 dispositive motion is GRANTED. Defendants may file a dispositive motion on or before 26 September 13, 2016. 27 Plaintiff's opposition to the dispositive motion shall be filed not more than twenty-eight 28 (28) days after the date on which Defendants' motion is filed. 1 Defendants shall file a reply brief no later than fourteen (14) days after the date Plaintiff's 2 opposition is filed. 3 This Order terminates Docket Nos. 34, 40 and 44. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: July 29, 2016 6 ______________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 12 Northern District of California United States District Court 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2