Smallwood v. Department of Veterans Affairs et al

Filing 23

STIPULATION and ORDER 22 Extending Briefing Schedule and Hearing Date on Motions to Dismiss; ORDER VACATING Scheduling Conference, signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker on 5/9/2024. Opposition to motion due by 5/24/2024; reply, if any, due no later than ten days after opposition filed; hearing date continued to 6/14/2024 at 9:00 AM before Hon. District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston, or to another date otherwise convenient for the Court; scheduling conference set for May 29, 2024, is VACATED. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SHAWN SMALLWOOD,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14

v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
et al.,

Case No. 1:24-cv-00141-JLT-CDB
ORDER ON STIPULATION EXTENDING
BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING
DATE ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS
ORDER VACATING SCHEDULING
CONFERENCE

15
Defendants.

(Doc. 22)

16
17
18

Plaintiff Shawn Smallwood initiated this action with the filing of a complaint against

19 Defendants on February 1, 2024, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The Court issued an
20 order setting the mandatory scheduling conference on April 25, 2024. (Doc. 5). On April 19,
21 2024, pursuant to the parties’ stipulated request, the Court continued the mandatory scheduling
22 conference in this case to May 29, 2024. (Doc. 17).
23

On that same day, Defendants Michael D. Brennan, Ross A. Davidson, Department of

24 Veterans Affairs, Anntwinette Dupree-Hart, Denis Richard McDonough, and Eric C. Roberts
25 (“the Federal Defendants”) filed a motion to dismiss. (Doc. 18). On May 3, 2024, Defendant
26 SASD Development Group LLC (“SASD”) filed a separate motion to dismiss. (Doc. 19).
27

Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulated request for order (1) adjusting the

28 briefing and hearing schedule on the pending motions to dismiss, and (2) continuing the

1 mandatory scheduling conference. (Doc. 22). In their stipulation, lead counsel for Plaintiff avers
2 that he is scheduled to be out of town on a family matter from May 10 to May 19, 2024, and
3 conferred with all counsel regarding the need to have additional time to prepare Plaintiff’s
4 opposition to SASD’s motion to dismiss. Id. at 2. The parties agreed to extend Plaintiff’s
5 deadline to file an opposition to SASD’s motion to dismiss from May 17, 2024, to May 24, 2024,
6 to accommodate counsel for Plaintiff’s travel plans. The parties further agreed that SASD’s
7 reply, if any, would be filed no later than June 3, 2024, and that the hearing date for both pending
8 motions to dismiss be continued to June 14, 2024. Id. at 3.
9

Finally, the parties agree that the mandatory scheduling conference should be extended to

10 a date after the Court’s ruling on the pending motions to dismiss. Id.
11

Accordingly, considering the parties’ representations and good cause appearing, the Court

12 ORDERS as follows:
13

1. Plaintiff’s deadline to file an opposition to SASD’s motion to dismiss is extended from
May 17, 2024, to May 24, 2024.

14
15

2. SASD’s reply, if any, shall be filed no later than ten days after the opposition was filed.
See Local Rule 230(d)

16
17

3. The hearing date for both pending motions to dismiss (Docs. 18, 19) shall be continued

18

to June 14, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., before the Hon. U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston,

19

or to another date otherwise convenient for the Court.

20

4. The mandatory scheduling conference set for May 27, 2024, is VACATED. The Court

21

shall issue an order resetting the scheduling conference following resolution of the

22

pending motions to dismiss.

23 IT IS SO ORDERED.
24

Dated:

May 9, 2024

___________________

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25
26
27
28

2

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

3