Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00520/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00520-30/pdf.json

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

---

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

A

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PAMELA J. FOX, ON BEHALF OF 

HERSELF AND AS NEXT FRIEND TO 

D.M.R., A MINOR,

 Plaintiffs,

 

 vs.

COUNTY OF TULARE, LETICIA 

CASTANEDA, ERICA SOTO, RON 

CASTANEDA, JULIA LANGLEY, CAROL 

HELDING, JOHN ROZUM, STEVEN D. 

RODGERS and DOES 1-100, 

 

 

 Defendants. 

1:11-cv-O520 AWI SMS

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING 

PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR 

FURTHER EXTENSION OF TIME FOR 

FILING OPPOSITION TO 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

In this action for damages, Plaintiffs have filed for a 30-day extension of time to file and 

opposition to Defendants motion for summary judgment. The court notes that the trial date in 

this action is currently set for September 30, 2014. There is therefore no concern of impinging 

on dates relevant to trial preparation in granting Plaintiff’s request. The court notes that a 

substantial amount of documentation has been submitted in support of Defendant’s motion for 

summary judgment and that a similarly substantial amount of material is expected from 

Plaintiffs’ in their opposition. The court is currently highly impacted by the combination of high 

workload and unfilled judicial positions. It is of no small benefit to the court if the parties, who 

will likely be required to wait a substantial time for the court’s ruling in any event, have 

Case 1:11-cv-00520-AWI-SMS Document 202 Filed 03/11/14 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-

A

adequate time to fully and completely brief the issues. Defendants contend they will be 

prejudiced by the grant of additional time to Plaintiffs because they will only have one week to 

reply to Plaintiff’s opposition. The court will mitigate any prejudice by granting additional time 

for Defendant’s reply. 

THEREFORE, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for a 30-day extension of 

time to submit an opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. 

Plaintiff’s shall file and serve their opposition not later than April 17, 2014. Defendant may file 

and serve their oppositions on or before Friday, May 2, 2014. Further extension of time will not 

be granted for submission of Plaintiff’s opposition, however Defendants may move for a oneweek further extension of time to reply upon request.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 10, 2014 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00520-AWI-SMS Document 202 Filed 03/11/14 Page 2 of 2