Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01335/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01335-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 443
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Accommodations
Cause of Action: 42:405 Fair Housing Act

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PHARILYN CHHANG,

Plaintiff,

v.

WEST COAST USA PROPERTIES LLC, et 

al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:23-cv-01335-SAB

ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO 

FILE A RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING 

ORDER

(ECF No. 58)

FIVE DAY DEADLINE

On June 28, 2024, the parties filed a joint scheduling report proposing a July 22, 2024 

deadline to amend the pleadings. (ECF No. 54 at 4.) The Court vacated the scheduling 

conference set for July 11, 2024 and issued a scheduling order on July 9, 2024, which set the 

deadline to amend the pleadings for July 22, 2024. (ECF Nos. 55, 57.) 

On July 22, 2024, Plaintiff filed an “unopposed motion to extend deadline to amend 

pleadings.” (ECF No. 58.) Plaintiff avers her counsel is unavailable from July 5, 2024 to August 

7, 2024 and is therefore unable to prepare and file a motion to amend the pleadings, should one 

be warranted. 1 (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff states Defendants do not oppose the motion; however, 

Defendants neither stipulated to the motion nor filed a statement of non-opposition. See L.R. 

230(c). 

1 Plaintiff is reminded that she must “seek to obtain a necessary extension from the Court or from other counsel or 

parties in an action as soon as the need for an extension becomes apparent. Requests for Court-approved extensions 

brought on the required filing date for the pleading or other document are looked upon with disfavor.” L.R. 144(d).

Case 1:23-cv-01335-SAB Document 59 Filed 07/23/24 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

The Court shall therefore require Defendants to file an opposition or non-opposition to 

Plaintiff’s motion to modify the scheduling order to extend the deadline to amend the pleadings

within five (5) days. If Defendants require additional time to prepare an opposition pursuant to 

Local Rule 230(c), they may request such extension in the filing. Alternatively, the parties may 

submit a stipulation to modify the scheduling order within five (5) days.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within five (5) days of entry of this order, Defendants shall file an opposition or 

non-opposition to Plaintiff’s motion to modify the scheduling order;

2. If Defendants file an opposition, Plaintiff may file a reply within three (3) days

of service of the opposition; and

3. The parties may alternatively stipulate to a modification of the scheduling order

within five (5) days of entry of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 23, 2024 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-01335-SAB Document 59 Filed 07/23/24 Page 2 of 2