Jones et al v. Tulare County et al

Filing 40

STIPULATION and ORDER GRANTING Defendant Paul Grenseman's request to file his responsive pleading to the First Amended Complaint no later than September 2, 2016. The Court notes that Plaintiffs and all Defendants, except for Defendant Grenseman , have consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). (ECF Nos. 26 and 29 ) Defendant Grenseman is thus DIRECTED to either consent or decline to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction no later than Se ptember 2, 2016. The hearing on the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 34 ) and Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 37 ), currently set for September 2, 2016, is TAKEN OFF CALENDAR and will be re-set after the Court has received Defendant Grenseman's resp onsive pleading(s) and consent/decline form. The briefing schedule for these motions remains unchanged; filing deadlines for the opposition and reply briefs remain as dictated by the noticed hearing date (i.e., September 2, 2016) and Local Rule 230(c) and (d). Order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 8/17/2016. (Rooney, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

MARGUERITE MELO, SBN 167782
JOHN J. SARSFIELD, SBN 138971
LAW OFFICES OF MELO AND
SARSFIELD, LLP
4216 South Mooney Blvd. PMB 136
Visalia, California 93277
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff Paul Grenseman

8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

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

Wendy Jones, Brian Jones and
William Fabricius,

13
14
15

Plaintiffs,
v.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Tulare County principals,
employees and agents, Tulare
County Sheriff’s Office, Tulare
County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux,
Tulare County Animal Control,
TC AC Director Dr. Cheryl
Duerksen, and the individuals
TC ACO Paul Grenseman,
TC ACO Jeffrey Lewis #1206,
TC ACO Larry Hernandez,
ACO Oren Hartley,
TC HHSA Timothy Lutz and
DOES 1 -100,
Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:15-CV-01779-EPG
STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF
TIME TO RESPOND TO
COMPLAINT; ORDER

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and agreed by and between Plaintiffs Wendy
Jones, Brian Jones, William Fabricius and Defendant Paul Grenseman, by and
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER

1
2
3
4
5
6

through their respective undersigned counsel that pursuant to Local Rule 144(a),
the time in which Defendant Paul Grenseman may respond to Plaintiffs’
complaint be extended until September 2, 2016. This extension of time is due to
the fact that Defendant Grenseman will need time to secure trial counsel to
represent him as present Counsel (Law Offices of Melo and Sarsfield LLP) has a
conflict.

7
8
9
10

/s/ Christine Garcia
Dated: August 12, 2016

___________________________
Christine Garcia, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiffs Wendy Jones, Brian
Jones and William Fabricius

Dated: August 12, 2016

LAW OFFICES OF MELO AND
SARSFIELD, LLP

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

/s/ John Sarsfield
By: _______________________________
John Sarsfield, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiff

20
21
22
23
24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///
2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

ORDER
Based on the above stipulation, Defendant Paul Grenseman may file his
responsive pleading to the First Amended Complaint no later than September 2,
2016. The Court notes that Plaintiffs and all Defendants except for Defendant
Grenseman have consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge
under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). (ECF Nos. 26, 29.) Defendant Grenseman is thus
DIRECTED to either consent or decline to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction no later
than September 2, 2016. The hearing on the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 34) and
Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 37), currently set for September 2, 2016, is
TAKEN OFF CALENDAR and will be re-set for hearing after the Court has
received Defendant Grenseman’s responsive pleading(s) and consent/decline
form. The briefing schedule for these motions remains unchanged; filing deadlines
for the opposition and reply briefs remain as dictated by the noticed hearing date
(i.e., September 2, 2016) and Local Rule 230(c) and (d).

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

Dated:

August 17, 2016

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER