From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Glover v. Board of Trustees of California State University

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California, Fresno Division
Sep 23, 2015
1:15-CV-000152-SAB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 23, 2015)

Opinion

          STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT

          STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff EDGAR GLOVER ("Plaintiff") and Defendants THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY ("Defendant California State University") and JANICE A. PARTEN ("Defendant Parten") (collectively "Defendants") by and through their counsel of record, enter into this stipulation with reference to the following facts:

         On September 2, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff's and Defendants' stipulation and request for, among other things, a two-week extension of time to respond to the Second Amended Complaint to meet and confer in an effort to potentially avoid a Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss. No other extension of time has been requested pertaining to Defendants' responsive pleading.

         Counsel for Plaintiff and Defendants have continued to meet and confer in good faith regarding whether certain claims are viable under California and federal law.

          MICHAEL K. HAGEMANN, ESQ., CLAY R. WILKINSON, ESQ., M.K. HAGEMANN, P.C., CENTURY CITY, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff EDGAR GLOVER

          TERRY A. WILLS, ESQ., STEPHEN R. McCUTCHEON, JR., ESQ., CHRISTOPHER S. ALVAREZ, ESQ., COOK BROWN, LLP, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA Attorneys for Defendants THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY and JANICE A. PARTEN

          Based upon the efforts by counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant, Plaintiff intends to file a motion for leave to amend the Second Amended Complaint on or about September 23, 2015, and file his Third Amended Complaint. Counsel for Defendants does not intend to oppose Plaintiff's motion.


         BASED UPON THE FOREGOING, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that Defendants California State University and Parten shall have fourteen (14) days from either (1) the filing of Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint upon the Court granting Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, or (2) the filing of the Court's order denying Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's amended complaint.

          ORDER

         IT IS SO ORDERED, for good cause having been shown, Defendants California State University and Parten shall have fourteen (14) days, from [ the filing of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint or the filing of the Court's order denying Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint ], to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's amended complaint.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Glover v. Board of Trustees of California State University

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California, Fresno Division
Sep 23, 2015
1:15-CV-000152-SAB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 23, 2015)
Case details for

Glover v. Board of Trustees of California State University

Case Details

Full title:EDGAR GLOVER, an individual, Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE…

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

Date published: Sep 23, 2015

Citations

1:15-CV-000152-SAB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 23, 2015)