Contreras v. National Guard Bureau et al

Filing 112

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 2/4/19 CONTINUING the 104 Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing to 3/22/19 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3 (KJM) before District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller with defendant's Reply due by 2/8/19. The court DECLINES to adopt the parties' stipulation for plaintiff's counsel to appear by phone. (Coll, A)

1 McGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
2 CHI SOO KIM
Assistant United States Attorney
3 501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, California 95814
4 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
5
Attorneys for Mark T. Esper,
6 Secretary of the United States Army
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GRACIELA CONTRERAS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

Case No. 2:14-CV-01282-KJM-KJN

v.

JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING
MODIFICATION TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND ORDER

MARK T. ESPER, SECRETARY OF THE
U.S. ARMY,
Defendant.

16
17
18

Plaintiff Graciela Contreras and Defendant Mark Esper, Secretary of the United States Army, by

19 and through their counsel, stipulate and respectfully request that the deadline for Defendant’s reply in
20 support of his motion for summary judgment be extended from February 8, 2019 to March 8, 2019, and
21 that the hearing be continued from March 8, 2019 to March 22, 2019. See 12/18/2018 Order [ECF No.
22 106]. There is good cause to modify the schedule due to the lapse in appropriations that began at the
23 end of the day on December 21, 2018 and continued until January 25, 2019, during which time work on
24 civil cases such as this one was prohibited. In addition, undersigned defense counsel was in a jury trial
25 that began on January 10, 2019 and completed on January 28, 2019.
26 / / /
27 / / /
28

Contreras v. Esper, No. 2:14-cv-01282 KMJ-KJN (“Contreras 3”)
JOINT STIPULATION RE: MODIFICATION TO SUMM. JUDGT BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND ORDER

1

The parties, by and through their counsel, stipulate and respectfully request the following

1

2 modification to the current schedule:
Current

3

Proposed

4

Defendant’s Reply

February 8, 2019

March 8, 2019

5

Hearing

March 8, 2019

March 22, 2019 at 10:00 a.m.
(Plaintiff’s counsel to appear by telephone)

6
7 The parties also stipulate to Plaintiff’s request to appear telephonically at the hearing.
8
9
10

Respectfully submitted,
DATED: January 31, 2019

11
12

McGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
/s/ Chi Soo Kim

13

CHI SOO KIM
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant Mark T. Esper

14
15
16
17

DATED: January 31, 2019

/s/ Rodney Williams

(auth’d 1/31/2019)

RODNEY WILLIAMS
Attorneys for Plaintiff

18
19
20
21

ORDER

22
The court ADOPTS in part the parties’ stipulation as to the summary judgment schedule:

23
24
25
26
27
28

defendant’s reply is due February 8, 2019 and the court will hear the motion on March 22, 2019 at 10:00
a.m. Absent good cause, however, the court requires personal appearance at motion hearings and
therefore DECLINES to adopt the parties’ stipulation for plaintiff’s counsel to appear by phone.
/////
Contreras v. Esper, No. 2:14-cv-01282 KMJ-KJN (“Contreras 3”)
JOINT STIPULATION RE: MODIFICATION TO SUMM. JUDGT BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND ORDER

2

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

2 DATED: February 4, 2019.
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Contreras v. Esper, No. 2:14-cv-01282 KMJ-KJN (“Contreras 3”)
JOINT STIPULATION RE: MODIFICATION TO SUMM. JUDGT BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND ORDER

3