Vivanco v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, et al.

Filing 42

STIPULATION and ORDER to (1) Extend Time for Defendants to File a Reply in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment and (2) Reschedule the Hearing on the Motion, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 4/17/2019. Pursuant to the partie s' stipulation, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants shall file their reply in support of their motion for summary judgment by April 26, 2019. The hearing on Defendants' motion for summary judgment currently set for April 26, 2019, is HEREBY CONTINUED to June 7, 2019, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 8 (BAM) before Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe. (Valdez, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 XAVIER BECERRA, State Bar No. 118517 Attorney General of California NEAH HUYNH, State Bar No. 235377 Supervising Deputy Attorney General PREETI K. BAJWA, State Bar No. 232484 Deputy Attorney General JENYA M. PARKMAN, State Bar No. 310302 Deputy Attorney General 1515 Clay St. 20th Floor Oakland, CA 94102 Telephone: (510) 879-0980 Fax: (415) 703-5843 E-mail: Preeti.Bajwa@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Defendants California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and S. Frauenheim 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 FRESNO DIVISION 12 13 14 15 MARISOL VIVANCO, individually and as Successor in Interest of SOLTON VIVANCO GONZALEZ (deceased), 16 17 v. 1:17-cv-00434 LJO BAM STIPULATION AND ORDER TO (1) EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO Plaintiff, FILE A REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND (2) RESCHEDULE THE HEARING ON THE MOTION 18 19 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS & REHABILITATION, et al., Judge: The Honorable Barbara A. McAuliffe Action Filed: December 20, 2016 20 Defendants. 21 22 Defendants California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and Warden S. 23 Frauenheim, and Plaintiff Marisol Vivanco, stipulate that the Court extend the time for 24 Defendants to file a reply in support of their summary judgment motion by April 26, 2019, and 25 reschedule the hearing date on the motion from April 26, 2019 at 9 a.m. to June 7, 2019 at 9 a.m. 26 As explained in the accompanying declaration and required by Civil Local Rule 144, there 27 is good cause for granting an extension because Defendants require additional time to address 28 1 Stipulation and Order to Extend Dispositive Motion Deadline (1:17-cv-00434 LJO BAM) 1 Plaintiff’s opposition to facts which the parties had previously stipulated. (Decl. of Preeti K. 2 Bajwa ¶ 4.) 3 This is the parties’ first request for an extension of time to file a reply in support of their 4 motion for summary judgment. 5 Dated: April 16, 2019 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California NEAH HUYNH Supervising Deputy Attorney General 6 7 8 9 /s/ Preeti K. Bajwa PREETI K. BAJWA JENYA M. PARKMAN Deputy Attorneys General Attorneys for Defendants California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and S. Frauenheim 10 11 12 13 14 Dated: April 16, 2019 _/s/ Jesse Ortiz_______________________ JESSE ORTIZ NOLAN BERGGREN Attorneys for Plaintiff Marisol Vivanco 15 16 17 18 SA2017303802 42106766.docx 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Stipulation and Order to Extend Dispositive Motion Deadline (1:17-cv-00434 LJO BAM) 1 ORDER 2 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED 3 that Defendants shall file their reply in support of their motion for summary judgment by April 26, 4 2019. The hearing on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment currently set for April 26, 2019, 5 is HEREBY CONTINUED to June 7, 2019, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 8 (BAM) before 6 Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe. 7 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Barbara April 17, 2019 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Stipulation and Order to Extend Dispositive Motion Deadline (1:17-cv-00434 LJO BAM)

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?