From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Abel v. Martel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 6, 2012
No. CIV S-09-1749 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2012)

Opinion

No. CIV S-09-1749 JAM CKD P

01-06-2012

JAMES ABEL, Plaintiff, v. MIKE MARTEL, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

The parties, via counsel, have filed a request that defendants be permitted to depose plaintiff and that certain deadlines be extended. The court will allow defendants to depose plaintiff. However, the court will not extend any deadlines at this point. While counsel for plaintiff has stipulated to extension of deadlines, he has filed a motion to withdraw and plaintiff himself is not a party to the stipulation.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants are granted permission to depose plaintiff; and

2. The request that deadlines for discovery and the filing of motions to compel be extended is denied.

_______________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Abel v. Martel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 6, 2012
No. CIV S-09-1749 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2012)
Case details for

Abel v. Martel

Case Details

Full title:JAMES ABEL, Plaintiff, v. MIKE MARTEL, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 6, 2012

Citations

No. CIV S-09-1749 JAM CKD P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2012)