Haet

(PS) Costa v. Haet

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 9, 20242:22-cv-01003California950 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL S. COSTA, No. 2:22-cv-01003-TLN-DB Plaintiff, v. ORDER DAVID L. HAET et al., Defendants. 16 This matter is before the Court on Pro Se Plaintiff Michael Costa’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Extension of Time to File an Appeal. (ECF No. 13.) Defendants David L. Haet, Mark D. Navarro, Michael Hulshof, Roberto Romo, Derrick Fok, and Andrew Ablalock (collectively, “Defendants”) did not file an opposition. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to File an Appeal. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// A detailed recitation of the facts and procedural history is not necessary for the disposition of Plaintiff’s motion. As relevant here, the Court adopted in full the findings and recommendations of Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes and dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint without leave to amend. (ECF No. 10.) The Clerk of Court entered judgment against Plaintiff on…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.