Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-03738/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-03738-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

PATRICIA BARBERA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

WMC MORTGAGE CORP., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 04-3738 SBA

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s second request for an extension of time to

file a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). 

On May 26, 2005, the Court struck portions of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”)

and ordered Plaintiff to file a SAC that removed the stricken allegations within 15 days. On June 1,

2005, Plaintiff substituted herself as counsel in place of her previously retained counsel. On June 8,

2005, Plaintiff requested an extension of time because she was seeking new counsel to represent her. 

The Court granted Plaintiff an extension, up to and including July 14, 2005, in which to file her

SAC. 

On July 13, 2005, Plaintiff sought a second request for an extension of time, up to and

including September 14, 2005, asserting that she is still seeking new counsel to represent her. 

Defendant WMC Mortgage Corporation opposes Plaintiff’s request, asserting that Plaintiff has filed

a state court action pro se, demonstrating that she can file her SAC in this Court without the

assistance of counsel. 

As a preliminary matter, eleventh-hour requests for extensions of time are disfavored. 

Furthermore, the failure to obtain counsel does not excuse Plaintiff from complying with deadlines

Case 4:04-cv-03738-SBA Document 105 Filed 07/15/05 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

imposed by the Court. Moreover, the Court’s May 26, 2005 Order provided Plaintiff with explicit

instructions on amending the FAC. Nevertheless, because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court

finds that a brief continuance is appropriate. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff is granted an extension of time to file her SAC. 

The SAC shall be filed no later than August 12, 2005. Plaintiff is cautioned that the Court is

disinclined to grant any further extensions of time to file her SAC. Failure to file her SAC by

August 12, 2005 shall be deemed sufficient grounds to dismiss this action without further

notice to Plaintiff.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 Dated: 7-15-05 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:04-cv-03738-SBA Document 105 Filed 07/15/05 Page 2 of 2