Perry et al v. Schwarzenegger et al
RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Martin F. Gutierrez, Dennis Hollingsworth, Mark A. Jansson, Gail J. Knight, ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8, A Project of California Renewal and Motion for Contempt. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Cooper, Charles) (Filed on 4/16/2010)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 KRISTIN M PERRY, SANDRA B STIER, PAUL T KATAMI and JEFFREY J ZARRILLO, Plaintiffs, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Plaintiff-Intervenor, v ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his official capacity as governor of California; EDMUND G BROWN JR, in his official capacity as attorney general of California; MARK B HORTON, in his official capacity as director of the California Department of Public Health and state registrar of vital statistics; LINETTE SCOTT, in her official capacity as deputy director of health information & strategic planning for the California Department of Public Health; PATRICK O'CONNELL, in his official capacity as clerkrecorder of the County of Alameda; and DEAN C LOGAN, in his official capacity as registrarrecorder/county clerk for the County of Los Angeles, Defendants, DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, GAIL J KNIGHT, MARTIN F GUTIERREZ, HAKSHING WILLIAM TAM, MARK A JANSSON and PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF CALIOFORNIA RENEWAL, as official proponents of Proposition 8, Defendant-Intervenors. / IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
C 09-2292 VRW ORDER
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
On March 22, 2010, the court ordered proponents not later than April 12, 2010 to "make the appropriate motion or submission" to supplement the trial record with documents obtained through third party production. Doc #623 at 24. The Ninth Circuit stayed
the court's order "pending appeal." March 26, 2010). PM PDT.
Doc #6 in 10-15649 (9th Cir
The appeal was dismissed on April 12, 2010 at 5
Id Doc #14. Proponents have made no submission or motion to
supplement the trial record.
Accordingly, proponents are ORDERED
to SHOW CAUSE in writing not later than April 16, 2010 at 5 PM PDT why the evidentiary record should not now be closed. Failure to
respond to this order shall be deemed grounds to close the evidentiary record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
VAUGHN R WALKER United States District Chief Judge