Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 16, 2022

Drevaleva v. McDonough

Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Docket
4:22-cv-00887
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Drevaleva v. McDonough: Judge Tigar extended Drevaleva’s reply deadline but denied her request for a reply longer than 15 pages.

Who this affects

Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva, whose reply deadline was extended but whose request for a reply longer than 15 pages was denied.

What happened

In Drevaleva v. McDonough, Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva asked for more time to file a reply and for permission to make the reply longer than 15 pages.

The court granted the deadline extension, moving the deadline from June 13, 2022, to June 20, 2022. It denied the request to file a reply longer than 15 pages.

Judge Tigar also reminded Drevaleva that the court ordinarily does not consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Drevaleva v. McDonough · No. 4:22-cv-00887
Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Date
June 16, 2022

Order

The court granted Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva’s motion to extend the deadline for filing her reply. The deadline changed from June 13, 2022, to June 20, 2022.

The court denied Drevaleva’s request to file a reply brief longer than 15 pages. The court also reminded her that it ordinarily does not consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief. The order did not decide the underlying motion to strike.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.