Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01630/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01630-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights 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

________________________________________________________________________

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE APPLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

* * * 

TIFFANY FENTERS,

Plaintiff,

v.

YOSEMITE CHEVRON; ABBCO

INVESTMENTS, LLC; ROBERT

ABBATE; GORDON SPENCER,

FORMER DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR

THE COUNTY OF MERCED; MERLE

WAYNE HUTTON, SUPERVISING

INVESTIGATOR FOR THE OFFICE OF

THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR THE

COUNTY OF MERCED; THE COUNTY

OF MERCED, CALIFORNIA; VICTOR K.

FUNG, CPA; ERIN M. McILHATTON,

CPA; CASSABON & ASSOCIATES;

DOES 1-10,

Defendants.

__________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CV-F-05-1630 OWW DLB

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S

EX PARTE APPLICATION

This matter came on for a telephonic hearing on October 5, 2006 on plaintiff Tiffany

Fenters' ex parte application for an extension of time to oppose the motions to dismiss

respectively filed by defendants Robert Abbate, Yosemite Chevron, Abbco Investments, LLC,

Case 1:05-cv-01630-OWW -DLB Document 84 Filed 10/12/06 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

________________________________________________________________________

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE APPLICATION

-2-

and defendants Victor K. Fung, Erin M. McIlhatton, and Cassabon & Associates.

Upon consideration of the submissions and arguments of the parties, the Court hereby

Orders as follows: 

1. The current October 16, 2006 hearing date is vacated and a new hearing date

of November 6, 2006 is set. The hearing will take place at 11:00 a.m.

2. Plaintiff is given to and until October 16, 2006 to oppose the subject motions.

3. The moving defendants will have to and until October 23, 2006 to file any replies.

4. No further applications for extensions of time will be considered. 

 5. Defendants request for sanctions is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 11, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01630-OWW -DLB Document 84 Filed 10/12/06 Page 2 of 2