Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05949/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05949-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 00:0000 Cause Code Unknown

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OSCAR RODRIGUEZ JR. dba PACIFIC

CONSTRUCTION CONCEPTS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

AMERICAN EXPRESS, ADVANTA, )

BANK ONE, BANK OF AMERICA, )

CITIBANK, DISCOVER, FORD )

CREDIT, HOME DEPOT, LOWES )

COMPANIES, INC., INTERNAL )

REVENUE SERVICE, NEXTEL )

COMMUNICATIONS, PINE )

MOUNTAIN LAKE, U.S. BANKCORP, )

VALLEY FIRST CREDIT UNION, )

WELLS FARGO BANK, NBMA, and )

DOES 1-100, INCLUSIVE, )

)

Defendants )

____________________________________)

CV F 03-5949 AWI LJO

ORDER SETTING SCHEDULE

FOR CONTINUATION OF

BRIEFING ON DEFENDANTS’

MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT AND DENYING

FURTHER STAY

In this action for damages and relief under the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act, the

court’s order of December 15, 2005, ordered plaintiff Oscar Rodriguez, Jr. (“Plaintiff”) to “file

and serve a declaration setting forth facts under oath or affirmation that support his request for

stay of proceedings in conformity with [50 App. U.S.C.,] section 522(b)(2)(A), and a letter

from Plaintiff’s commanding officer in conformity with section 522(b)(2)(B).” Doc. 182 at 3. 

On December 29, 2005, Plaintiff filed a declaration stating Plaintiff “will be able to appear

March 9, 2006,” which is a date 90 days from the due date for Plaintiff’s opposition to the

Case 1:03-cv-05949-AWI-LJO Document 185 Filed 02/07/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

motion for summary judgment. The declaration submitted by Plaintiff on December 29, 2005,

states Plaintiff’s commanding officer is not available until January 28 and 29, 2006. With

regard to facts that pertain to plaintiffs’ ability to appear, the declaration states only that

Plaintiff was “on orders” at the time his opposition brief was due. 

The court has examined Plaintiff’s declaration and finds it does not set forth facts that

address the manner in which current military requirement materially affects the Plaintiff’s

ability to appear with sufficient specificity. The court therefore concludes that any further stay

is not warranted. While the court will deny further stay of proceedings pursuant to the

Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act, the denial will have little, if any, effect on the

proceedings. The court notes that Plaintiff will be able to appear on March 9, 2006. The court

will therefore set a briefing schedule that will grant sufficient time to Plaintiff to prepare

opposition to any or each of the motions for summary judgment and for reply briefing.

THEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion for further stay of proceedings is DENIED.

2. Plaintiff shall file and serve any opposition or oppositions to Defendants’ motions for

summary judgement on or before 4:00 p.m. Thursday, March 9, 2006.

3. Any reply briefs shall be filed and served not later than 4:00 p.m. Thursday, March 16,

2006.

4. As of Friday, March 17, 2006, the matter will be taken under submission and the court

will thereafter render its decision.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 7, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

h2ehf UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-05949-AWI-LJO Document 185 Filed 02/07/06 Page 2 of 2