1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 BELQES ZAID ABOZAID, Case No. 20-cv-01538-JSC

8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 9 v. FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME

10 FOUR UNKNOWN NAMED AGENTS OF Re: Dkt. No. 38 THE U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER 11 PATROL, et al., Defendants. 12 13 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for an order nunc pro tunc granting Plaintiff an 14 enlargement of time to respond to the motion to dismiss filed by Defendants Anders and Nell. 15 (Dkt. No. 38.) Plaintiff’s counsel attests in a supporting declaration that recently over 10 16 members of counsel’s staff have tested positive for COVID-19, and that this caused Plaintiff and 17 counsel to miss the January 11, 2021 deadline to respond to the motion to dismiss. (Dkt. No. 38 at 18 4.) Defendants Anders and Nell argue that granting Plaintiff’s motion is inappropriate because 19 they “have had to live under the shadow of Plaintiff’s complaint, while Plaintiff has done little to 20 advance this action in the ten months since she filed it.” (Dkt. No. 39 at 3.) 21 Defendants do not identify—nor can the Court—any prejudice they would suffer by 22 allowing Plaintiff additional time to respond to the motion to dismiss in light of the unprecedented 23 circumstances. Accordingly, pursuant to N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 6-3(d) the Court GRANTS 24 Plaintiff’s motion. Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion is due March 16, 2021. Defendants Anders 25 and Nell shall file a reply brief by March 30, 2021, with a hearing on the motion to be held April 26 15, 2021. 27 Additionally, Plaintiff filed this action against Four Unknown Named Agents of The U.S. 1 Nell as defendants. Although the complaint has not been amended, Mr. Anders and Ms. Nell have 2 appeared, consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge, and have moved to dismiss. (Dkt. 3 Nos. 23, 33, 35.) Further, it is unclear if Plaintiff intends to pursue two additional defendants. If 4 so, until those additional defendants appear and consent the Court cannot decide any dispositive 5 motions. See

(c); Williams v. King,

(2017). Accordingly, on 6 || or before March 1, 2021, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint that identifies the defendants by 7 || name and clarifies whether Plaintiff is still pursuing additional unnamed defendants. Assuming 8 || Plaintiff is proceeding only against Mr. Anders and Ms. Nell, the motion to dismiss can be decided 9 || based on the allegations of the original complaint according to the schedule set forth above. 10 This Order disposes of Dkt. No. 38. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 Dated: January 22, 2021 , ne 13 JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY United States Magistrate Judge 15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28