From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Benedict v. Hewlett-Packard Co.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division
Jun 30, 2015
13-cv-00119-BLF (N.D. Cal. Jun. 30, 2015)

Opinion


ERIC BENEDICT, Plaintiff, v. HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, Defendant. No. 13-cv-00119-BLF United States District Court, N.D. California, San Jose Division. June 30, 2015

          ORDER (1) CONSTRUING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME AND COMPEL PRODUCTION AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION; ORDERING DEFENDANT TO RESPOND WITHIN FOUR (4) DAYS [Re: ECF 339]

          BETH LABSON FREEMAN, District Judge.

         On June 30, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a motion seeking an extension of time to file their reply brief in support of class certification, as well as to compel Defendant's production of certain documents. ECF 339.

         The Court hereby construes this motion as an administrative motion brought pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11, and ORDERS Defendant to respond, in no more than five (5) pages, by 12 p.m. on July 6, 2015.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Benedict v. Hewlett-Packard Co.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division
Jun 30, 2015
13-cv-00119-BLF (N.D. Cal. Jun. 30, 2015)
Case details for

Benedict v. Hewlett-Packard Co.

Case Details

Full title:ERIC BENEDICT, Plaintiff, v. HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division

Date published: Jun 30, 2015

Citations

13-cv-00119-BLF (N.D. Cal. Jun. 30, 2015)