(PC) Baker v. Shahbazian

E.D. California

(PC) Baker v. Shahbazian

DecidedFebruary 5, 2025

Docket1:24-cv-01279

StatusUnknown

This text of (PC) Baker v. Shahbazian ((PC) Baker v. Shahbazian) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

(PC) Baker v. Shahbazian, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MILLARD WAYNE BAKER, Case No. 1:24-cv-01279 HBK 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 13 MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME v. 14 (Doc. No. 17) 15 DR. SHAHBAZIAN, FEBRUARY 18, 2025 DEADLINE 16 Defendant. 17 18 Pending before the Court is Defendant Shahbazian’s motion for a 14-day extension of the 19 deadline to file a responsive pleading to the operative complaint filed on February 3, 2025. (Doc. 20 No. 17, “Motion”).1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) provides for extending deadlines for 21 good cause shown, if the request to extend time is made before the existing deadline. 22 Defendant’s current deadline to file a responsive pleading to the operative complaint is February 23 3, 2025. The Court finds shown good cause to grant the Motion. 24 //// 25 1 The Motion seeks an extension to the deadline to file a responsive pleading but is labeled as seeking an 26 extension of time to file a waiver of service of process. Defendant timely filed a notice of waiver of service on January 6, 2025. (Doc. No. 16). A motion’s “nomenclature is not controlling.” Miller v. 27 Transamerican Press, Inc., 709 F.2d 524, 527 (9th Cir. 1983) (quoting Sea Ranch Ass’n v. Cal. Coastal Zone Conservation Comm’ns, 537 F.2d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir. 1976)). Instead, we “construe [the motion], 28 however styled, to be the type proper for the relief requested.” Id. 1 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED: 2 1. Defendant’s Motion (Doc. No. 17) is GRANTED. 3 2. Defendant shall file a response to the operative pleading no later than February 18, 4 2025.” 5 ° | Dated: _ February 4, 2025 Mile. Th fares Hack 7 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA 3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ? Defendant requested a February 17, 2025 deadline but the Court does not set deadlines on Federal 28 holidays or non-business days.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MILLARD WAYNE BAKER, Case No. 1:24-cv-01279 HBK 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 13 MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME v. 14 (Doc. No. 17) 15 DR. SHAHBAZIAN, FEBRUARY 18, 2025 DEADLINE 16 Defendant. 17 18 Pending before the Court is Defendant Shahbazian’s motion for a 14-day extension of the 19 deadline to file a responsive pleading to the operative complaint filed on February 3, 2025. (Doc. 20 No. 17, “Motion”).1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) provides for extending deadlines for 21 good cause shown, if the request to extend time is made before the existing deadline. 22 Defendant’s current deadline to file a responsive pleading to the operative complaint is February 23 3, 2025. The Court finds shown good cause to grant the Motion. 24 //// 25 1 The Motion seeks an extension to the deadline to file a responsive pleading but is labeled as seeking an 26 extension of time to file a waiver of service of process. Defendant timely filed a notice of waiver of service on January 6, 2025. (Doc. No. 16). A motion’s “nomenclature is not controlling.” Miller v. 27 Transamerican Press, Inc., 709 F.2d 524, 527 (9th Cir. 1983) (quoting Sea Ranch Ass’n v. Cal. Coastal Zone Conservation Comm’ns, 537 F.2d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir. 1976)). Instead, we “construe [the motion], 28 however styled, to be the type proper for the relief requested.” Id. 1 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED: 2 1. Defendant’s Motion (Doc. No. 17) is GRANTED. 3 2. Defendant shall file a response to the operative pleading no later than February 18, 4 2025.” 5 ° | Dated: _ February 4, 2025 Mile. Th fares Hack 7 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA 3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ? Defendant requested a February 17, 2025 deadline but the Court does not set deadlines on Federal 28 holidays or non-business days.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

(PC) Baker v. Shahbazian, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pc-baker-v-shahbazian-caed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack