Martin

Martin v. Muniz

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 21, 20205:17-cv-01690California1,670 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

DISCUSSION

« A. Requests for Extension of Time E On April 30, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiff an extension S || of time of forty-two days from the filing date of the order to file 1s || an opposition, such that Plaintiff had until June 11, 2020, to file a 16 || timely opposition. Dkt. No. 151. Then on May and 7, 2020, || Plaintiff filed two requests for an extension of time to file an || Opposition which were not docketed as pending motions and i9 || therefore did not come to the attention of the Court at that time. || Dkt. Nos. 153. 154. It appears Plaintiff filed these requests || before receiving the Court’s April 30, 2020 order granting his || first request for an extension of time. Nevertheless, Plaintiff still || managed to file his opposition and supporting documents on May || 11, 2020. Dkt. Nos. 155, 156, 157, 158. Accordingly, the Court || will deny his requests for an extension of time as moot. Dkt. Nos. 153, 154. || ///

|| B. Request for Court Order Plaintiff has filed a document containing numerous requests, || including an order…

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.