Drevaleva v. McDonough
This text of Drevaleva v. McDonough (Drevaleva v. McDonough) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 TATYANA EVGENIEVNA Case No. 22-cv-00887-JST DREVALEVA, 8 wo. Plaintiff, ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE TO 9 y FILE REPLY 10 Re: ECF No. 41 DENIS RICHARD MCDONOUGH, et al., 11 Defendants. a 12
& 13 The Court grants Plaintiff Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva’s motion to extend the deadline
S to file her reply from June 13, 2022 to June 20, 2022. ECF No. 41. 15 Plaintiffs request to file a reply brief of longer than 15 pages is denied.
16 Plaintiff states that she “cited numerous statutes in [her] Reply that [she] hadn’t cited in 17
[her] First Motion to Strike.” Jd. at 3. Plaintiff is reminded that the Court does not ordinarily 18 consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief. See Cardone v. Cnty. of Alameda, No. 19 19-cv-00221-JST, 2019 WL 7816822, at *3 n.4 (N.D. Cal. July 30, 2019). 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 Dated: June 15, 2022 22 3 JON S. TIGAR nited States District Judge 24 25 26 27 28
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Drevaleva v. McDonough, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drevaleva-v-mcdonough-cand-2022.