From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Sahota

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 13, 2011
No. CIV S-10-0762 KJN (TEMP) P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2011)

Opinion

No. CIV S-10-0762 KJN (TEMP) P.

January 13, 2011


ORDER


On October 1, 2010, defendants filed a motion for an extension of time in which to respond to the complaint and on November 18, 2010, filed a motion to dismiss. They filed another motion to dismiss on December 15, 2010; and on December 23, 2010, defendants filed a motion for an extension of time, nunc pro tunc, to file the motion and serve it on plaintiff's new address.

In the meantime, plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time in which to oppose the first motion to dismiss, but then timely filed his opposition. In addition, he has filed a motion for a clarification.

1. Defendants' motions for extensions of time (doc. nos. 24 35) are granted; and the motions to dismiss (doc no. 30) are deemed timely.

2. Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time (doc. no. 27) and motion for clarification (doc. no. 36) are granted; plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss filed December 15, 2010. Defendants' reply is due within fourteen days of the date the opposition is filed.

3. Because Docket Nos. 26 and 30 are the same, Docket No. 26 is denied.

DATED: January 12, 2011


Summaries of

Smith v. Sahota

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 13, 2011
No. CIV S-10-0762 KJN (TEMP) P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2011)
Case details for

Smith v. Sahota

Case Details

Full title:GREGORY SMITH, Plaintiff, v. PEETRANJAN SAHOTA, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Jan 13, 2011

Citations

No. CIV S-10-0762 KJN (TEMP) P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2011)