Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00277/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00277-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Age)

---

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DOROTHY GRANT,

Plaintiff,

 v.

WESTAFF TEMPORARY AGENCY,

Defendant /

No. C-04-0277 MMC

ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON

MOTION TO DISMISS

(Docket No. 52)

Before the Court is defendant Westaff Temporary Agency’s motion, filed August 25,

2005, to dismiss the above-titled action, initially scheduled to be heard October 7, 2005. 

After defendant notified the Court that the copy of the motion defendant sent to plaintiff by

certified mail had been returned to defendant unclaimed, the Court continued the hearing to

October 28, 2005 to afford defendant additional time to serve plaintiff with the motion, and

to allow plaintiff adequate time to respond.

On October 11, 2005, plaintiff filed a document in which she stated she had received

the Court’s order rescheduling the hearing, but had not received a copy of the motion. 

Plaintiff further stated she would attempt to obtain a copy of the motion from the Clerk’s

Office on October 14, 2005. Under the circumstances, plaintiff will be afforded additional

time to respond to defendant’s motion.

Accordingly, the deadline for plaintiff to file an opposition to defendant’s motion is

Case 3:04-cv-00277-MMC Document 62 Filed 10/14/05 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

hereby CONTINUED to October 28, 2005. There will be no further extensions of such

deadline. The deadline for defendants to file a reply is hereby CONTINUED to

November 4, 2005. The hearing on the motion to dismiss is hereby CONTINUED to

November 18, 2005. 

Plaintiff is hereby advised that she has the responsibility to prosecute her lawsuit

and must take steps to keep track of developments therein regardless of her problems with

mail delivery. Accordingly, although the Court and defendant will continue to serve

documents on plaintiff by mail, erratic mail delivery will no longer be accepted as an excuse

for plaintiff’s failure to file a timely response or to appear for a scheduled court proceeding. 

Until the conclusion of the instant litigation, plaintiff must regularly check the docket to

determine whether any motions or court orders have been filed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 14, 2005 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:04-cv-00277-MMC Document 62 Filed 10/14/05 Page 2 of 2