Lopez v. Lee et al

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
United States District Court
Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ANDREW LOPEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
M. LEE, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 23-cv-03660-HSG
ORDER GRANTING NUNC PRO
TUNC EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE
OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S
SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION
AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS;
Re: Dkt. No. 92
Good cause being shown, the Court GRANTS nunc pro tunc (1) Defendants’ request for
an extension of time to file their opposition to Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion and to
Plaintiff’s request for spoliation sanctions, Dkt. No. 92, and (2) Defendants’ request to file a
combined cross-motion and opposition that does not exceed 30 pages, Dkt. No. 93. Defendants’
opposition to Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion, Dkt. No. 95, and Plaintiff’s request for
spoliation sanctions, Dkt. No. 94, are deemed timely filed.
In light of Plaintiff’s objection to Defendants’ request for an extension of time (Dkt. No.
96), the Court resets the briefing schedule for Defendants’ summary judgment motion as follows.
Plaintiff shall file his opposition to Defendants’ summary judgment motion by February 6, 2026,
and Defendants shall file their reply in by February 20, 2026.
With respect to Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion, the Court sua sponte GRANTS
Plaintiff an extension of time to January 16, 2026 to file his reply.
//
//
//
//
Case 4:23-cv-03660-HSG Document 97 Filed 01/06/26 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
United States District Court
Northern District of California
This order terminates Dkt. Nos. 92, 93.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
______________________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge
1/6/2026
Case 4:23-cv-03660-HSG Document 97 Filed 01/06/26 Page 2 of 2