Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01125/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01125-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

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

GRAYSON SERVICE, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CRIMSON RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 

CORP. et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:14-cv-01125-SAB

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN 

ANSWER AND CONTINUING 

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

(ECF No. 76, 77)

DEADLINE: JANUARY 15, 2016

On December 10, 2015, the parties filed a stipulation to extend time for Defendant to file 

a response to the third amended complaint. Defendant’s responsive pleading is due on 

December 23, 2015. On December 22, 2015, Plaintiff filed an opposition to an application for an 

extension of time. Thereafter, Defendant filed an application for an “unopposed” extension of 

time to file a responsive pleading.

Defendant seeks an extension of time to February 1, 2016 to file a responsive pleading 

and a continuance of the scheduling conference. Defendant contends that the parties are engaged 

in settlement discussions and wants to avoid incurring additional costs. Defendant states that 

counsel for Plaintiff indicated that they would agree to an extension to file an answer, but not for 

Defendant to file another motion to dismiss the complaint. Further, Defendant requests that the 

scheduling conference set for January 5, 2016 be continued until after February 1, 2016.

Case 1:14-cv-01125-SAB Document 78 Filed 12/23/15 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

Plaintiff opposes the motion on the ground that Defendant should not be granted an 

opportunity to file another motion to dismiss. Plaintiff states that it does not oppose an addition 

extension of time of one week to file an answer to the pleadings, but opposes any additional 

extension of time.

The Court finds good cause to grant an extension of time for Defendant to file an answer 

to the third amended complaint. However, based on Plaintiff’s objection to the extension of time 

requested, the Court shall only grant an extension of time to January 15, 2016, for an answer to 

the third amended complaint to be filed. If Defendant seeks to file a motion to dismiss, the 

motion must be filed by December 23, 2015. This is the final extension of time to file an answer 

to the third amended complaint that shall be granted in this action.

As the Court is extending time for an answer to be filed, the scheduling conference shall 

also be continued.

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant’s application for an extension of time to file an answer to the third 

amended complaint is GRANTED in part;

2. Defendant’s answer to the third amended complaint shall be filed on or before 

January 15, 2016;

3. The scheduling conference currently set for January 5, 2016 at 9:45 a.m. is 

continued to February 16, 2016, at 2:30 p.m. in Courtroom 9; and

4. The parties shall file a joint scheduling report one week prior to the scheduling 

conference.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 23, 2015 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01125-SAB Document 78 Filed 12/23/15 Page 2 of 2