Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01435/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01435-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Graham Packaging
Defendant
Sargis Sarkizi
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SARGIS SARKIZI, an individual,

Plaintiff,

v.

GRAHAM PACKAGING, a California 

business entity form unknown, and Does 1 

through 25, inclusive,

Defendant.

__________________________________/

1:13-cv-01435-AWI-SKO

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND 

TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED 

COMPLAINT

On June 17, 2014, Defendant Graham Packaging Company (“Defendant”) filed a motion 

seeking extension of time to file an answer to Plaintiff’s amended complaint due to the pending 

motion for reconsideration of the Magistrate Judge’s ruling, granting Plaintiff’s motion to amend 

complain. Defendant has requested permission to delay filing an answer until fourteen (14) days 

following this Court’s ruling on Defendant’s motion for reconsideration. On June 19, 2014, 

Plaintiff Sargis Sarkizi (“Plaintiff”) filed a statement of non-opposition to Defendant’s motion. 

Because Defendant’s motion is unopposed and because district courts have the inherent power to 

control their dockets (See Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000)), 

Defendant’s motion to extend time is GRANTED. Defendant will not be required to file a 

Case 1:13-cv-01435-AWI-SKO Document 32 Filed 06/24/14 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

responsive pleading, if at all, until fourteen (14) days following this Court’s ruling on 

Defendant’s motion for reconsideration.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 24, 2014 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01435-AWI-SKO Document 32 Filed 06/24/14 Page 2 of 2