Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05783/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05783-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

UNOPPOSED APPLICATION FOR A TWO WEEK Luparello v State, et al.

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN MSJ Case No. CIV F 02 5783 AWI SMS P

Mark Allen Kleiman, Esq. (SBN 115919)

12400 Wilshire Boulevard -- Fourth Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90025

phone (310) 442-4820

fax (310) 442-4830

Email: markkleiman@earthlink.net

Attorney for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

THOMAS GAETANO LUPARELLO

Plaintiff , 

 v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. CIV F 02-5783 AWI SMS P

PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED APPLICATION

FOR A TWO-WEEK EXTENSION OF TIME

IN WHICH TO FILE A MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

This is an unopposed motion for one last, brief extension of time in which to file motions

for dispositive pleadings. The extension is necessary because, despite the best efforts of both

counsel, it has just now become clear that a settlement cannot be achieved within the established

time limits. Plaintiff’s counsel was only yesterday informed of the State’s position in this regard. 

Since only three working days remain before the motion cut-off, defendant has agreed that it will

not oppose this final application for a two-week extension of time. (Plaintiff has previously

refrained from drafting the motion to avoid running up attorney’s fees and thus facilitate the

settlement process.)

//

//

Case 1:02-cv-05783-AWI -SMS Document 91 Filed 12/16/05 Page 1 of 3
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

UNOPPOSED APPLICATION FOR A TWO WEEK Luparello v State, et al.

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN MSJ 2 Case No. CIV F 02 5783 AWI SMS P

For the last three months, the parties had been engaged in serious negotiations to see if

this case could be resolved without further litigation. Those negotiations had included a lengthy

face-to-face meeting and multiple telephone calls between counsel. In the course of these

negotiations, the parties engaged in some highly specific negotiations about the precise extent of

relief sought. Plaintiff also provided detailed timesheets and supporting legal authority in

response to an inquiry about the attorney’s fees sought. 

On December 7, 2005, the Court granted the parties’ prior request for an extension of

time up to and including December 19, 2005 in which to file dispositive motions. 

After receiving this order, plaintiff’s counsel placed calls to defense counsel on December

9, 2005 and again on Monday, December 12, 2005. Defense counsel returned the calls on

December 13, 2005 and explained that she had been absent from work due to a family illness. 

She explained that it would not be possible to arrange any settlement within the existing time

limits. She further stated that although the defendant understood that the plaintiff had held off on

preparing a motion for summary judgment in order to keep his attorney’s fees down and facilitate

settlement, the plaintiff should now proceed to file whatever motions he felt appropriate.

This news, coming on December 13, 2005, leaves precious little time in which to prepare

and file a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff’s counsel, having delayed three months

because of the negotiations, needs time to get a supplemental declaration from the plaintiff

describing changed conditions which heighten the need for injunctive relief over and above the

conditions which existed three months ago when negotiations began.

Defense counsel stated that she would not oppose an application for an extension of time. 

Plaintiff therefore seeks a brief 14 day extension up to and including January 2, 2006. 

Dated: December 14, 2005 LAW OFFICES OF MARK ALLEN KLEIMAN

By: /s/ Mark Allen Kleiman 

MARK ALLEN KLEIMAN

CA SBN 115919

Attorney for Plaintiff

THOMAS GAETANO LUPARELLO

Case 1:02-cv-05783-AWI -SMS Document 91 Filed 12/16/05 Page 2 of 3
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

UNOPPOSED APPLICATION FOR A TWO WEEK Luparello v State, et al.

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN MSJ 3 Case No. CIV F 02 5783 AWI SMS P

ORDER

The dispositive motions deadline is extended to January 2, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 15, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

b6edp0 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-05783-AWI -SMS Document 91 Filed 12/16/05 Page 3 of 3