USA v. Leal Flores et al

25-cr-4133-JO
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
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
INES LEAL FLORES (1);
CARLOS EDUARDO MORALES RAMOS (2),
Defendants.
Case No.: 25-cr-4133-JO
ORDER CONTINUING MOTION
HEARING/TRIAL SETTING
On November 6, 2025, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Continue the Motion
Hearing/Trial Setting currently set for November 21, 2025 to January 9, 2026. For good
cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the joint motion to continue [Dkt. 46] and sets the
Motion Hearing/Trial Setting on January 9, 2026 at 1:30 p.m.
For the reasons set forth in the joint motion, the Court finds that the ends of justice
will be served by granting the requested continuance, and these outweigh the interests of
the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Accordingly, the delay occasioned by this
continuance is excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).
//
//
//
//
//
//
Case 3:25-cr-04133-JO Document 47 Filed 11/19/25 PageID.<pageID> Page 1
of 2

25-cr-4133-JO
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
Further, on November 6, 2025, Defendant Carlos Eduardo Morales Ramos filed a
pretrial motion that remains pending. 	Accordingly, the Court finds that time from
November 6, 2025 to January 9, 2026 shall be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act on
grounds that a pretrial motion is pending. 	18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D). 	This time is also
excluded as to the co-defendant. United States v. Messer, 197 F.3d 330, 336 (9th Cir. 1999)
(“It is well established that an exclusion from the Speedy Trial clock for one defendant
applies to all codefendants.”).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:__________________ 	___________________________
Hon. Jinsook Ohta
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
11/19/2025
Case 3:25-cr-04133-JO Document 47 Filed 11/19/25 PageID.<pageID> Page 2
of 2