Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00532/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00532-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jo Anne B. Barnhart
Defendant
Trudi Kelsey
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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 1

Merely labeling an opposition memorandum as a “motion” is insufficient to avoid

compliance with the timing requirements set forth in Civil Local Rule 7-3.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TRUDI KELSEY,

Plaintiff,

 v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant /

No. C-05-0532 MMC

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING

SCHEDULE; CONTINUING HEARING ON

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

On May 10, 2005, defendant filed a motion to dismiss the above-titled action, for

lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On May 12, 2005, the Clerk of the Court issued a Notice,

setting a June 17, 2005 hearing on defendant’s motion to dismiss, and ordering plaintiff to

file any opposition within the time provided under Civil Local Rule 7-3. Consequently,

plaintiff’s opposition was due no later than May 27, 2005. See Civil L. R.

7-3(a) (providing opposition must be filed no later than 21 days prior to hearing date).

On June 6, 2005, plaintiff filed a “Motion to Strike Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss,” in

which plaintiff sets forth her argument as to why the Court should deny the motion to

dismiss. Plaintiff failed to set forth any explanation for her untimely filing.1

 In any event,

and to facilitate resolution of the jurisdictional issue presented by defendant’s motion, the

Case 3:05-cv-00532-MMC Document 13 Filed 06/07/05 Page 1 of 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

2

Court hereby SETS the following briefing schedule:

1. Defendant may, no later than June 17, 2005, file and serve a reply to plaintiff’s

opposition.

2. The hearing on defendant’s motion is continued from June 17, 2005 to July 1,

2005.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 7, 2005 /s/ Maxine M. Chesney 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-00532-MMC Document 13 Filed 06/07/05 Page 2 of 2