Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00083/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00083-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Civil Rights

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KONG MENG XIONG, and

LUH XIONG

Plaintiffs,

v.

CITY OF MERCED, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:13-cv-00083-SKO

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' REQUEST TO EXTEND PAGE LIMITS 

FROM MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT

(Doc. 43)

On May 26, 2015, Defendants filed a letter brief requesting a page-limit extension on their 

motion for summary judgment. Defendants explain they wish to file one summary judgment 

motion addressing the claims of both Plaintiffs. To adequately address all the claims against each 

of the five Defendants, however, Defendants seek to extend the motion page limit from 30 to 50 

pages.

Case 1:13-cv-00083-SKO Document 44 Filed 05/27/15 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

As there are multiple plaintiffs and defendants, a number of claims at issue, and because 

Defendants plan to address each Plaintiff's claims together in one motion, both Defendants and 

Plaintiffs may file briefs (motion and opposition briefs) up to 50 pages, exclusive of a table of 

contents, a table of cases, and any supporting declarations and exhibits. Any reply brief may be up 

to 30 pages in length.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 27, 2015 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00083-SKO Document 44 Filed 05/27/15 Page 2 of 2