Bauer, et al. vs. Harris, et al.

Filing 10

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PLEADING DEADLINES AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 1/11/2012. (Yu, L)

C. D. Michel - S.B.N. 144258
Sean A. Brady - S.B.N. 262007
2 MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
180 E. Ocean Boulevard, Suite 200
3 Long Beach, CA 90802
Telephone: [phone]
4 Facsimile: 562-216-4445
Email: [e-mail]
1

5

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

FRESNO BRANCH COURTHOUSE
BARRY BAUER, STEPHEN
WARKENTIN, NICOLE FERRY,
LELAND ADLEY, JEFFREY
HACKER, NATIONAL RIFLE
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA,
INC., CALIFORNIA RIFLE AND
PISTOL ASSOCIATION
FOUNDATION, HERB BAUER
SPORTING GOODS, INC.,
Plaintiffs
vs.
KAMALA HARRIS, in Her Official
Capacity as Attorney General For the
State of California; STEPHEN
LINDLEY, in His Official Capacity
as Acting Chief for the California
Department of Justice, and DOES 110,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS
STIPULATION TO EXTEND
PLEADING DEADLINES AND
ORDER
(Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), 15(a)(1)(B);
Local Rules 143-144)

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND PLEADING DEADLINES AND ORDER

1

I.

2

INTRODUCTION

3

The parties, Plaintiffs Barry Bauer, Stephen Warkentin, Nicole Ferry, Leland

4

Adley, Jeffrey Hacker, National Rifle Association of America, Inc., California

5

Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Herb Bauer Sporting Goods, Inc.

6

(collectively “Plaintiffs”) and Defendants Kamala Harris and Stephen Lindley

7

(collectively “Defendants”), through their respective attorneys of record, hereby

8

jointly stipulate to extend the deadline for Defendants’ submission of a responsive

9

pleading in this matter, and request an order from the Court for an extension of

10

Plaintiffs’ deadline to file a First Amended Complaint in accordance with the

11

stipulated schedule set forth herein.

12
13

II.

14

RECITALS/GROUNDS FOR RELIEF

15

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their initial Complaint in this matter on August

16
17

25, 2011;
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs effected service upon Defendants on December 22,

18

2011 because they were awaiting resolution of California Senate Bill 819 (Leno,

19

2011-2012) (“SB 819”), due to its potential to impact Plaintiffs’ claims;

20
21
22
23
24

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs intend to file an Amended Complaint in this matter due
to the passage of SB 819;
WHEREAS, Defendants’ Answer to the initial Complaint in this matter or
other responsive pleading must be filed on or before January 12, 2012;
WHEREAS, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) 15(a), Plaintiffs

25

are required to file their Amended Complaint by January 12, 2012 – the same day

26

by which Defendants’ Answer or other responsive pleading to the initial Complaint

27

is due – or, Plaintiffs must wait until 21 days after service of Defendants’ response

28

to the initial Complaint in this matter to file their Amended Complaint unless
2
STIPULATION TO EXTEND PLEADING DEADLINES AND ORDER

1

written consent of the opposing party or the Court is obtained;
WHEREAS, Local Rule 144(a) of this Court allows a 28-day extension of

2
3

time for responding to complaints and certain other documents, and all parties

4

agree that Defendants should be allowed this extension;
WHEREAS, Local Rule 144(a) also provides that “[a]ll other extensions of

5
6

time must be approved by the Court;”
WHEREAS, FRCP 6(b)(1)(A) allows for the extension of time for good cause,

7
8

“with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before

9

the original time or its extension expires;”
WHEREAS, neither party has obtained an extension of time relating to any

10
11

matter for which this extension is sought;
WHEREAS, both parties to this action seek to conserve judicial resources and

12
13

time by attempting to avoid the need for this court to consider future amendments

14

to pleadings;
WHEREAS, both parties to this action likewise seek to keep the costs of

15
16

litigation low;
AND WHEREAS, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND AGREE TO THE

17
18

FOLLOWING:
1. Defendants shall be allowed a 28-day extension of time to file their Answer

19
20

or other responsive pleading in accordance with Local Rule 144(a) whether to

21

Plaintiffs’ Complaint or Amended Complaint.
2. Plaintiffs shall file their Amended Complaint on or before Thursday,

22
23

February 9, 2012, or as the court otherwise deems convenient.

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///
3
STIPULATION TO EXTEND PLEADING DEADLINES AND ORDER

1

3. Defendants shall file their Answer or other responsive pleading to

2

Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint within 28 days of it being filed, or as the court

3

otherwise deems convenient.
The parties hereby jointly request that this Court grant the relief sought by this

4
5
6

stipulation.
Dated: January 10, 2012

MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

7

/s/ C. D. Michel
C. D. Michel
Attorney for Plaintiffs

8
9
10
11

Dated: January 10, 2012

Deputy Attorney General
/s/Kimberly Granger
(as approved on 1/10/12)
Attorney for Defendants

12
13
14

ORDER

15
16

The stipulation of the parties is approved.

17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20

Dated:
ci4d6

January 11, 2012

/s/

Michael J. Seng

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
STIPULATION TO EXTEND PLEADING DEADLINES AND ORDER