Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-01252/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-01252-21/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 195
Nature of Suit: Contract Product Liability
Cause of Action: 15:2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM ZABIT,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CATERPILLAR, INC., and PETERSON

POWER SYSTEMS, INC.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 06-01252 JSW

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S

OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment currently is set for a hearing on August 24,

2007. Pursuant to this Court’s local rules, Plaintiff’s opposition was due on August 3, 2007. 

See N.D. Civ. L.R. 7-3(a). No opposition has been filed. 

Although on July 30, 2007, the Court issued an Order resolving a joint discovery

dispute. Although Plaintiff intimated in the parties’ joint case management statement that

Defendants’ motion could not be resolved pending resolution of the dispute, Defendants did not

concur with Plaintiff’s position. Thus, because neither party had asked in the joint letter brief or

in the case management statement to alter the briefing schedule or the hearing date, the Court

expressly stated in its July 30, 2007 Order that any requests to alter the current briefing

schedule or hearing date must be accompanied by a showing of good cause. The Court’s July

30, 2007 Order did not alter the current briefing schedule on the parties’ motions for summary

judgment or the hearing date set for August 24, 2007. 

Accordingly, if Plaintiff intends to file an opposition to Defendant’s motion, he must

submit a request to late file that brief and demonstrate good cause to permit the late filing. If, in

Case 3:06-cv-01252-JSW Document 125 Filed 08/06/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 alternative, Plaintiff seeks to continue the hearing date and briefing schedule, he must either

submit an administrative motion or stipulation that demonstrates good cause to do so. Pending

a further Order from the Court, the hearing set for August 24, 2007 remains set on this Court’s

calendar, and the current briefing schedule remains in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 6, 2007 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-01252-JSW Document 125 Filed 08/06/07 Page 2 of 2