Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02154/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02154-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities 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 This motion was determined to be suitable for decision *

without oral argument. L.R. 78-230(h). 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES SANFORD, )

) 2:04-cv-2154-GEB-PAN(JFM)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER*

)

DEL TACO, INC., d/b/a DEL TACO )

# 115; PHILIPPE DURAND GORRY, ) 

)

Defendants. )

)

On August 1, 2006, Defendants filed an ex parte application

to strike Plaintiff’s opposition to their motion for summary judgment

and Plaintiff’s counter-motion for summary judgment. (Application

(“App.”) at 2.) Alternatively, Defendants request a continuance of

the hearing date on both summary judgment motions and an additional

fourteen days to file and serve a reply to Plaintiff’s opposition and

an opposition to Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion. (Id.) 

Defendants argue Plaintiff’s opposition to their motion for

summary judgment, which was filed July 31, 2006, should be stricken

because it was not timely filed. (Id. at 3-4.) However, an Order

filed July 10, 2006, stated that “[a]ny opposition to the motion for

Case 2:04-cv-02154-GEB-EFB Document 84 Filed 08/02/06 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

2

summary judgment shall be filed no later than July 31, 2006 . . . .” 

(Order, July 10, 2006, at 4-5.) Since Plaintiff filed his opposition

by the date specified in that Order, it was not untimely. 

Defendants also contend Plaintiff’s counter-motion for

summary judgment should be stricken because it was not timely filed. 

(App. at 4.) Under Local Rule 78-230(e), “[a]ny counter-motion or

other motion that a party may desire to make that is related to the

general subject matter of the original motion shall be served and

filed . . . on the date prescribed for the filing of opposition.” 

Since the counter-motion for summary judgment was filed on July 31,

2006, the date prescribed for the filing of the opposition, the

counter-motion was timely filed if it concerns “the general subject

matter of the original motion.” L.R. 78-230(e). Although Defendants

assert “Plaintiff’s desire for summary judgment is simply not related

to the general subject matter of [their] motion for summary judgment,”

Defendants do not explain how the general subject matter of these two

motions, both of which concern alleged architectural barriers at a

Taco Bell restaurant in Sacramento, differ. (App. at 4.) 

Lastly, Defendants argue they cannot “adequately prepare a

reply and an opposition and file it prior to the August 7, 2006,

hearing,” and request the “Court continue the . . . hearing date for

three weeks and set the filing deadline for Defendants’ reply and

opposition papers for August 14, 2006.” (Id. at 5.) Local Rule 78-

230(e) provides that “[i]n the event [a] counter-motion or other

related motion is filed, the Court may continue the hearing on the

original and all related motions so as to give all parties reasonable

opportunity to serve and file oppositions and replies to all pending

motions.” Accordingly, the hearing on all pending motions is

Case 2:04-cv-02154-GEB-EFB Document 84 Filed 08/02/06 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 Defendants requested the hearing be continued to August 28, 1

2006, but that date is not an available law and motion hearing date. 

3

continued to September 5, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. Defendants shall file 1

any reply to Plaintiff’s opposition as well as any opposition to

Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment no later than August 14, 2006. 

Plaintiff shall file any reply to Defendants’ opposition no later than

August 21, 2006. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August 1, 2006

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02154-GEB-EFB Document 84 Filed 08/02/06 Page 3 of 3