AtPac, Inc v. Aptitude Solutions, Inc., et al
Filing
169
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 5/31/11 DENYING 166 Ex Parte Application. For purposes of the motion referenced in plaintiffs ex parte application, the parties are relieved of the letter briefing requirement set forth in 56 Order. Said motion may be noticed on the undersigneds regular law and motion calendar. (Meuleman, A)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
ATPAC, INC.,
11
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
vs.
APTITUDE SOLUTIONS, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
15
16
No. CIV S-10-294 WBS JFM (TEMP)
ORDER
/
Plaintiff has submitted an ex parte application for an order shortening time for
17
hearing on a motion for terminating sanctions due to defendants’ alleged failure to comply with
18
discovery orders. Under the revised scheduling order filed October 28, 2010, the discovery cut-
19
off is September 15, 2011. Plaintiff fails to demonstrate why a motion for terminating sanctions
20
must be heard on shortened time.
21
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
22
1. Plaintiff’s ex parte application (docket no. 166) is denied.
23
2. For purposes of the motion referenced in plaintiff’s ex parte application, the
24
parties are relieved of the letter briefing requirement set forth in the court’s November 18, 2010
25
order. (Docket no. 56.) Said motion may be noticed on the undersigned’s regular law and
26
motion calendar. The joint statement filed under Local Rule 251 shall be limited to twenty
1
1
pages, with printing in twelve-point type. This page limit does not include exhibits. The joint
2
statement shall be filed no later than fourteen days prior to the date noticed for hearing on the
3
motion and a courtesy copy of the joint statement and accompanying exhibits shall be submitted
4
to the TEMP chambers.
5
DATED: May 31, 2011.
6
7
8
9
10
JMM
atpac.ost
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
