Salmen

Salmen v. Bryant

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 13, 20233:22-cv-01508California1,097 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JUSTIN SALMEN, Case No.: 3:22-cv-01508-BAS-AHG Plaintiff, ORDER:

v. (1) DENYING AS MOOT OFFICER BRYANT, et al., PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANTS

Defendants. TO REPLY; and 16 (2) GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF

TIME TO RESPOND TO THE

COMPLAINT

21 [ECF Nos. 11, 12]

23 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Request for Order Directing Defendants to Reply (ECF No. 11) (“Plaintiff’s Motion”), filed December 27, 2022, and Defendants’ Ex Parte Motion for an Extension of Time to Respond to the Complaint (ECF No. 12) (“Defendants’ Motion”), filed December 30, 2022. Rule of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dictates that where, as here, Defendants have timely waived service under Rule 4(d), their deadline to file a responsive pleading to the Complaint is within 60 days after the…

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.