Clinton v. Allison

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARKEITH CLINTON Case No.: 3:23-cv-01471-CAB-SBC CDCR # AY-1315, ORDER REGARDING MOTION FOR Plaintiff, 13 ENLARGEMENT OF TIME FOR FACT vs. EVIDENCE [Doc. No. 48] C. ALLEN, et al., Defendants.

22 On February 7, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). [Doc.

23 No. 44.] On February 24, 2025, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the SAC, with a hearing date (for briefing purposed only) of April 1, 2025. [Doc. No. 47.] Pursuant to ACivLR 7.1.e.2, any opposition to the motion was due on March 18, 2025. To date, no opposition has been filed.

27 On March 18, 2025, Plaintiff filed a motion for enlargement of time for fact evidence/discovery. [Doc. No. 48.] However, motions to dismiss are determined on the || pleadings, and no fact discovery is necessary for Plaintiff to file an opposition. See || Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6); Gant v. Cnty of Los Angeles, 772 F.3d 608, ||614. Accordingly, the Court construes Plaintiff's motion for enlargement of time for fact ||evidence as a motion for an extension of time to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss the SAC. So construed, the Court GRANTS the motion, and gives Plaintiff until || April 18, 2025,! to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss the SAC.

7 Plaintiff is cautioned that if no opposition is filed, pursuant to ACivLR 7.1.f.3.c., 8 may constitute consent to the granting of the motion and the case may be dismissed 9 its entirety.

10 IT IS SO ORDERED.

11 Dated: March 21, 2025 € Hon. Cathy Ann Bencivengo 13 United States District Judge || ———___—_—_—- 28 Defendants shall have until April 25, 2025, to file a reply to the opposition.