Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_17-cv-06953/USCOURTS-cand-4_17-cv-06953-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other 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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CYNTHIA N TURANO,

Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-06953-KAW 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

ENLARGE TIME; DENYING EX 

PARTE APPLICATION TO STRIKE 

DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS AS 

UNTIMELY

Re: Dkt. No. 41, 42

On August 10, 2018, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint 

and a motion to strike the second amended complaint. (Dkt. Nos. 38, 39.) On August 14, 2018, 

Plaintiff filed an ex parte application to strike Defendants' motions as untimely, as the motions 

were due within 14 days of the filing of the second amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 41.) That same 

day, Defendants filed a motion to enlarge the time to file their motions to dismiss and strike. (Dkt. 

No. 42.)

The Court GRANTS Defendants' motion to enlarge time. The filing of the motions seven 

days after the deadline is not prejudicial to Plaintiff, nor will it cause any delay to the case.1 While 

Defendants must be more careful in the future about correctly calculating dates, there is no 

showing that Defendants' conduct was not in good faith.

Because the Court grants Defendants' motion to enlarge time, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's 

ex parte application to strike Defendants' motions as untimely. The Court will, however, extend 

Plaintiff's opposition deadline to August 29, 2018. Defendants' reply is due by September 5, 

 

1

Indeed, Plaintiff was willing to stipulate to a seven-day extension if Defendants agreed to 

withdraw their motions. (Huang Decl., Exh. A, Dkt. No. 41-1.)

Case 4:17-cv-06953-KAW Document 46 Filed 08/20/18 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

2018.

In the future, the parties should be mindful of the Northern District of California's 

Guidelines for Professional Conduct, which states that "a lawyer should agree to reasonable 

requests for extensions of time when the legitimate interests of his or her client will not be 

adversely affected."

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 20, 2018

__________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:17-cv-06953-KAW Document 46 Filed 08/20/18 Page 2 of 2