Opinion
22-cv-05229-RS
07-21-2023
FRANCESCO CORALLO, Plaintiff, v. NSO GROUP TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, et al., Defendants.
ORDER EXTENDING REPLY DEADLINE
RICHARD SEEBORG CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff requested and was granted an additional week to file his opposition brief. Defendants contend the extension causes prejudice because their reply is now due on August 7, 2023, which conflicts with their lead attorney's obligations in connection with a trial scheduled to commence on August 8, 2023, in the Central District. Defendants do not suggest lead counsel will bear primary responsibility for preparation of the reply, but assert the scheduling conflict will preclude his “meaningful participation in the preparation or review” of the briefing.
Particularly because the extension given to plaintiff was based in part on his assertion that his lead counsel's opportunity to participate in preparing and reviewing the opposition would otherwise be limited, defendants' deadline for filing the reply will be extended to August 28, 2023. Although defendants have not indicated the anticipated length of the Central District trial in which lead counsel will be involved, this extension should provide sufficient opportunity for him to participate in the preparation and review of the reply even assuming the trial is ongoing throughout the extended period.
IT IS SO ORDERED.