The Peace and Freedom Party et al v. Bowen
Filing
22
STIPULATION and ORDER 20 to change hearing and briefing schedule on signed on District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 8/13/2012. Defendant's 14 Motion to Dismiss Hearing is CONTINUED to 9/10/2012 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB). Opposition to Motion shall be due on 8/20/2012 and defendant's Reply shall be due 9/3/2012. (Marciel, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672
Attorney General of California
TAMAR PACHTER, State Bar No. 146083
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
ALEXANDRA ROBERT GORDON,State Bar No. 207650
Deputy Attorney General
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004
Telephone: (415) 703-5509
Fax: (415) 703-5480
E-mail: Alexandra.RobertGordon@doj.ca.gov
Attorneys for Defendant Secretary of State Debra
Bowen
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13
PEACE AND FREEDOM PARTY, PETA
LINDSAY, and RICHARD BECKER,
14
15
v.
12-00853-GEB-EFB
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
Plaintiffs, ORDER RE CHANGING HEARING
DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
16
(Local Rule 230(f))
17
18
DEBRA BOWEN, in her official capacity as
Secretary of State of the State of California,
Courtroom: 10
Judge: The Hon. Garland E. Burrell, Jr.
Defendant. Action Filed: April 3, 2012
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER (12-00853-GEB-EFB)
1
Plaintiffs The Peace and Freedom Party, Peta Lindsay, and Richard Becker (collectively,
2
the “Plaintiffs”) and Defendant Secretary of State of California Debra Bowen (collectively, the
3
“Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
4
5
6
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2012, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss, currently set for
hearing on August 27, 2012;
WHEREAS, on August 10, 2012, counsel for Plaintiffs notified counsel for Defendant
7
that a conflict had arisen on the August 27, 2012 hearing date and proposed continuing the
8
hearing date to September 10, 2012 or the earliest date thereafter that is convenient for the Court;
9
WHEREAS, counsel for Defendant is amenable to the proposed continuance so long as it
10
is acceptable to the Court;
11
WHEREAS, if the Court continues the hearing to September 10, 2012, or a date
12
thereafter, the parties wish to modify the briefing schedule so that, pursuant to Local Rule 230,
13
Plaintiffs’ opposition to the motion to dismiss would be due on August 20, 2012, and Defendant’s
14
reply would be due on September 3, 2012;
15
16
WHEREAS, no previous extensions of time or continuances have been sought on this
motion;
17
THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby stipulated that:
18
The hearing date on Defendant’s motion to dismiss shall be continued until September 10,
19
20
21
22
2012, or the earliest date thereafter that is convenient for the Court;
Pursuant to Local Rule 230, Plaintiffs’ opposition to the motion to dismiss shall be due on
August 20, 2012; and
Pursuant to Local Rule 230, Defendant’s reply shall be due on September 3, 2012.
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER (12-00853-GEB-EFB)
1
Dated: August 10, 2012
By: KAMALA D. HARRIS
Attorney General of California
TAMAR PACHTER
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
2
3
/s/ Alexandra Robert Gordon
ALEXANDRA ROBERT GORDON
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendant Secretary of State
Debra Bowen
4
5
6
7
Dated: August 10, 2012
By: BARNES LAW
8
/s/ Robert Barnes
ROBERT BARNES
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Chinatown
Neighborhood Association and Asian
Americans for Political Advancement
9
10
11
12
13
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: 8/13/2012
14
15
___________________________________
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
Senior United States District Judge
16
17
DEAC_Signature-END:
18
19
61khh4bb
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER (12-00853-GEB-EFB)
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?