Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00134/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-00134-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 422
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158
Cause of Action: 28:0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BAP)

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OPPERWALL,

Plaintiff,

v.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-00106-JST 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 

REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF 

BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Re: ECF No. 5

Plaintiff has requested, in a letter addressed to the docketing clerk, that the briefing 

schedule for his bankruptcy appeals be modified to extend the deadline for his opening brief to 

August 2, 2016. ECF No. 5. He states that this is because part of the record on appeal “is still 

locked until 7/5/15.” Id. Defendant has responded that while it “has no answer as to why the 

transcripts have been uploaded to PACER but are not in Opperwall’s possession,” all of the 

transcripts requested have been uploaded to this Court’s docket, and therefore anyone with a 

PACER account may pull them for their use. ECF No. 6. It also adds that it is Plaintiff’s duty to 

fix any problems with the transcript. Id.

If this is true, it is unclear to the Court why Plaintiff is unable to download the necessary 

transcripts from this Court’s docket in order to complete his brief. However, Plaintiff states that 

Defendant is trying to mislead the Court, and that in fact some transcripts are still locked and are 

not available on the docket. ECF No. 7. Plaintiff does not, however, identify which transcripts 

are not available.

Accordingly, the Court shall grant in part the request for modification of Plaintiff’s 

briefing schedule. Plaintiff’s deadline for his opening briefs, in both bankruptcy appeals, is 

extended to June 24, 2016. Plaintiff may also file a response to this order, no later than June 24, 

2016, that identifies the specific transcripts that were requested but are not available on the docket 

Case 3:16-cv-00134-JST Document 9 Filed 06/17/16 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

for these bankruptcy appeals. The response should further address Defendant’s assertion that it is 

Plaintiff’s duty to fix any problems with transcript production. If a response is filed, the Court 

will re-consider Plaintiff’s request to extend the opening brief deadline to August 2, 2016. If no 

response is filed, the deadline will remain at June 24, 2016.

Finally, the parties are reminded that any requests for administrative relief must comply 

with Civil L.R. 7-11 on Motions for Administrative Relief.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 17, 2016

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:16-cv-00134-JST Document 9 Filed 06/17/16 Page 2 of 2