Opinion
No. 2:10-cv-1388 MCE KJN P
07-24-2012
RANDOLPH M. DIAZ, Plaintiff, v. M. MARTEL, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
By notice filed July 19, 2012 (Dkt. No. 25), and pursuant to Woods v. Carey, _F.3d _, 2012 WL 2626912 (9th Cir., July 06, 2012), defendants have again informed plaintiff of the requirements for opposing defendants' pending motion to dismiss, filed on April 2, 2012. (See Dkt. No. 25 at 2; see also Dkt. No. 22 at 1-2.) Defendants also request, on behalf of plaintiff, an extension of time within which plaintiff must file and serve his opposition to the pending motion.
For good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's request (Dkt. No. 25), to accord plaintiff an extension of time within which to file and serve an opposition to defendants' pending motion to dismiss, is granted;
2. Plaintiff shall file and serve an opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss within twenty-eight (28) days after the filing date of this order;
3. Defendants may file and serve a reply to plaintiff's opposition within fourteen (14) days after service of plaintiff's opposition; and
4. This court's order filed June 20, 2012 (Dkt. No. 24), requiring that plaintiff file his opposition within thirty days, is vacated.
SO ORDERED.
_________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE