Davidson v. Korman

Full title: EVELYN DAVIDSON, Plaintiff, v. CARL E. KORMAN, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Nov 9, 2010

CIV. NO. S-10-2502 FCD GGH PS (E.D. Cal. Nov. 9, 2010)

Opinion

CIV. NO. S-10-2502 FCD GGH PS.

November 9, 2010

ORDER

GREGORY HOLLOWS, Magistrate Judge

Plaintiff has filed a document styled, "Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Motion Due to Procedural Error: Defendants' Failure to Serve." Plaintiff states that she did not receive defendants' motion to dismiss and therefore did not file an opposition. She became aware of the motion when she received defendants' reply. Plaintiff's filing will be construed as a request for an extension of time to file an opposition to defendants' motion. Defendants have filed a response indicating that they have no opposition to an extension of 14 days.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's November 1, 2010 (dkt. # 51) request for an extension of time is granted; and

2. Plaintiff is granted fourteen (14) days from the date of this order in which to file and serve an opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss. Defendants' reply, if any, shall be filed seven days thereafter.

DATED: November 9, 2010