ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8, a Project of California Renewal et al v. Bowen et al

Filing 24

OPPOSITION by ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8, a Project of California Renewal, National Organization for Marriage California - Yes on 8, Sponsored by National Organization for Marriage, John Doe #1 to #23 MOTION for RECONSIDERATION re #18 Ex Parte Application, to Shorten Time on Hearing on Preliminary Injunction MOTION for RECONSIDERATION re #18 Ex Parte Application, to Shorten Time on Hearing on Preliminary Injunction. (Chandler, Timothy)

ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8, a Project of California Renewal et al v. Bowen et al

Doc. 24

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

James Bopp, Jr. (Ind. State Bar No. 2838-84)* Barry A. Bostrom (Ind. State Bar No.11912-84)* Sarah E. Troupis (Wis. State Bar No. 1061515)* Scott F. Bieniek (Ill. State Bar No. 6295901)* BOPP, COLESON & BOSTROM 1 South Sixth Street Terre Haute, IN 47807-3510 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Counsel for All Plaintiffs Timothy D. Chandler (Cal. State Bar No. 234325)** ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND 101 Parkshore Drive, Suite 100 Folsom, CA 95630 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Counsel for All Plaintiffs *Pro Hac Vice Application Pending ** Designated Counsel for Service United States District Court Eastern District of California Sacramento Division

Case No. 2:09-CV-00058-MCE-DAD ProtectMarriage.com, et al., P l a i nt i f f s , v. Debra Bowen, et al., Defendants. PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO STATE DEFENDANTS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Hon. Morrison C. England, Jr.

Plaintiffs' Opposition to State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time

1

Dockets.Justia.com

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

Plaintiffs ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8, a Project of California Renewal ("ProtectMarriage.com), National Organization for Marriage California - Yes on 8, Sponsored by National Organization for Marriage ("NOM-California"), and John Doe #1, an individual, and as a representative of the Class of Major Donors, respectfully oppose State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, and in support thereof state: Plaintiffs are currently in the process of perfecting service in compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c). See Affidavit of Michele L. Schmidt in Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to State's Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, at ¶¶ 3-4. Furthermore, Plaintiffs have made every attempt to provide State Defendants with courtesy copies of all documents filed in this action in a timely manner so as to not prejudice State Defendants in their preparation of any opposition to Plaintiffs' Motions. See Affidavit of Sarah E. Troupis in Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, at ¶¶ 3-8 (setting for how Plaintiffs' have provided, and attempted to provide, copies of all documents in a timely manner, and State Defendants' unwillingness to provide electronic addresses); Affidavit of Scott F. Bieniek in Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, at ¶¶ 3-9 (setting forth how Plaintiffs have provided, and attempted to provide, copies of all documents in a timely manner to State Defendants). Furthermore, State Defendants' accusation that Plaintiffs have failed to comply with Local Rule 6-144 is inaccurate. Plaintiffs filed their Motion to Shorten Time for Hearing on Motion for Preliminary Injunction a mere two days after filing the Complaint, prior to receiving any contact information for Defendants' counsel. As such, it was impossible for Plaintiffs' counsel to obtain a stipulated hearing date. See Affidavit of Sarah E. Troupis in Support of

Plaintiffs' Opposition to State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time

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

Plaintiffs' Motion to Shorten Time for Hearing on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, at ¶ 4. Furthermore, Plaintiffs have filed a Motion for Protective Order and an Ex Parte Motion for Leave to File Documents Under Seal, pursuant to Local Rule 39-141(e). Until such time as this Court rules on said Motions, Plaintiffs will not provide signed versions of any declarations filed in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction. As a courtesy, Plaintiffs proactively prepared redacted versions of said declarations and provided them to State Defendants on Monday, January 12, 2009. See Affidavit of Scott F. Bieniek in Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, at ¶ 8. Therefore, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court deny State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time. Respectfully submitted,

___/s/_Timothy D. Chandler____________ Timothy D. Chandler (Cal. Bar No. 234325) ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND 101 Parkshore Drive, Suite 100 Folsom, CA 95630 Counsel for All Plaintiffs Designated Counsel for Service

James Bopp, Jr. (Ind. Bar No. 2838-84)* Barry A. Bostrom (Ind. Bar No.11912-84)* Sarah E. Troupis (Wis. Bar No. 1061515)* Scott F. Bieniek (Ill. Bar No. 6295901)* BOPP, COLESON & BOSTROM 1 South Sixth Street Terre Haute, IN 47807-3510 Counsel for All Plaintiffs *Pro Hac Vice Application Pending

Plaintiffs' Opposition to State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time

3

1 2

PROOF OF SERVICE I, Timothy D. Chandler, am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My

3 business address is 101 Parkshore Drive, Suite 100, Folsom, California 95630. 4 On January 13, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing document described as Plaintiffs'

5 Opposition to State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening 6 Time on Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which will be served on all Defendants along with 7 the Summons and Amended Complaint. 8 I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

9 above is true and correct. Executed on January 13, 2009 at Folsom, California. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiffs' Opposition to State Defendants' Ex Parte Application for Reconsideration of Order Shortening Time /s/ Timothy D. Chandler Timothy D. Chandler (SBN 234325) Attorney for Plaintiffs

4