Opinion
2:18-cv-02420-TLN-CKD (PS)
05-12-2023
ERIC ANTHONY ALSTON, JR., Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendants.
RIVERA HEWITT PAUL LLP Jonathan B. Paul, SBN 215884 Jill B. Nathan, SBN 186136 Attorneys for Defendants COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, Deputy E. BALL, Deputy MADRIAGO and RIVERA (sued as “Riviera”)
RIVERA HEWITT PAUL LLP
Jonathan B. Paul, SBN 215884
Jill B. Nathan, SBN 186136
Attorneys for Defendants
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, Deputy E. BALL, Deputy MADRIAGO and RIVERA (sued as “Riviera”)
[PROPOSED] ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING
CAROLYN K. DELANEY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This matter is proceeding on the original complaint. (Doc. 1). The Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of pro se Plaintiff Alston's negligence claims against defendants Deputy Ball, Deputy Madriago, and the County of Sacramento, and reversed the dismissal of Plaintiff's excessive force, Bane Act, battery, and negligence claims against defendant Deputy Riviera. Those claims are remanded to this Court for further proceedings. (Doc. 92). Responding Defendants were ordered to answer the operative complaint at Doc. 1 on or before May 19, 2023. (See Doc. 92).
Plaintiff Alston subsequently filed a motion for leave to amend the complaint, to add additional claims and defendants. (Doc. Nos. 93, 94). Defendants now request an extension of time in which to respond to the operative complaint, up to and including thirty (30) days after the order on Plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint.
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants County of Sacramento, Deputy Ball, Deputy Madriago, and Deputy Riviera's request for an extension of time in which to file and serve responses to the operative complaint is GRANTED.
2. Defendants shall respond to the operative complaint no later than thirty (30) days after the order on Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint.