Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05874/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05874-3/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KATHY CORONADO, et al., CASE NO. CV-F-03-5874 LJO

 

Plaintiff, ORDER FOR RESPONSE TO 

EX PARTE APPLICATION

vs.

COUNTY OF MADERA, et al.,

Defendant.

 /

The Court has received and reviewed plaintiffs’ ex parte application to extend time to file an

opposition to defendant County of Madera Correctional Managed Care’s and defendantDebraMassetti’s

motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff cites as the reasons for failure to timely file an opposition: the

confusion as to the Court’s department and date of hearing; the lack of proper filing by defendants and

the lack of prejudice to defendant if the extension is granted. 

The Court directs defendants to respond to the ex parte application on the point of prejudice to

defendants. The response should be filed no later than March 9, 2006 and shall be limited to a maximum

of 3-pages. The matter will be submitted without further argument. Local Rule 78-230(h).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 6, 2006 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-05874-NEW Document 69 Filed 03/06/06 Page 1 of 1