From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wakefield v. Tilton

United States District Court, E.D. California, Fresno Division
Jan 15, 2009
1:07-cv-01802 OWW GSA (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2009)

Summary

granting motion to dismiss after statutory screening

Summary of this case from Castle v. Eurofresh, Inc.

Opinion

1:07-cv-01802 OWW GSA (PC).

DEADLINE: FEBRUARY 26, 2009

January 15, 2009


ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S FIRST REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT


On January 12, 2009, Defendant Indermill filed a request for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's complaint. Good cause having been presented to the Court and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFOR, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant's request for an extension of time is GRANTED;

2. Defendant shall file a response to the complaint on or before February 26, 2009.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Wakefield v. Tilton

United States District Court, E.D. California, Fresno Division
Jan 15, 2009
1:07-cv-01802 OWW GSA (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2009)

granting motion to dismiss after statutory screening

Summary of this case from Castle v. Eurofresh, Inc.
Case details for

Wakefield v. Tilton

Case Details

Full title:DARRYL WAKEFIELD, Plaintiff, v. JAMES E. TILTON, et al., Defendant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California, Fresno Division

Date published: Jan 15, 2009

Citations

1:07-cv-01802 OWW GSA (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2009)

Citing Cases

Castle v. Eurofresh, Inc.

Eurofresh argues that a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is appropriate where, as here, the claims are complex and the…