Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00126/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00126-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans w/ Disabilities Act (ADA)

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BERETTA HOFF,

Plaintiff,

 v.

AT&T-PBIS, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 07-00126 SI

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

REQUEST FOR A CONTINUANCE OF

HEARING

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is currently scheduled for hearing on January 18,

2008. Plaintiff’s counsel has requested that the Court continue this hearing until February 15, 2008,

because counsel is scheduled to appear in another court at the same time. The Court hereby GRANTS

the request [Docket No. 41], but finds that the motion can be heard prior to plaintiff’s proposed date.

The motion for summary judgment will be heard on February 8, 2008, at 9:00 a.m., and the case

management conference will be held on the same date at 2:30 p.m.

Plaintiff’s counsel also appears to ask the Court for leave to file a late opposition to the motion

for summary judgment, a request defendants oppose. Defendants appear to be correct that plaintiff’s

opposition was due on November 9, 2007, because the motion had been scheduled for hearing on

November 30, 2007. Plaintiff’s counsel states that he was not able to file an opposition due to the death

of his aunt on December 11, 2007, but the Court fails to see how that unfortunate event could have had

an impact on the preparation of a document due one month earlier. In the interests of resolving this

dispute on the merits, however, the Court will permit plaintiff’s counsel to file a late opposition.

Plaintiff’s counsel is advised to follow the local rules with respect to deadlines, and the Court will not

Case 3:07-cv-00126-SI Document 45 Filed 01/08/08 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

tolerate any further failures to follow deadlines on the part of plaintiff’s counsel. Plaintiff’s opposition

is due on or before January 18, 2008, and defendants’ reply is due on or before January 25, 2008.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 8, 2008 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00126-SI Document 45 Filed 01/08/08 Page 2 of 2