Wiese et al., v. Becerra, et al.,

Filing 46

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 6/16/17 ORDERING that Defendant's last day to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint shall be no later than 21 days after entry of this Court's order regarding the Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 XAVIER BECERRA, State Bar No. 118517 Attorney General of California TAMAR PACHTER, State Bar No. 146083 Supervising Deputy Attorney General ALEXANDRA ROBERT GORDON, State Bar No. 207650 Deputy Attorney General JOHN D. ECHEVERRIA, State Bar No. 268843 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 Defendants 8 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 12 13 WILLIAM WIESE, et al., 2:17-cv-00903-WBS-KJN 14 Plaintiffs, STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 15 v. 16 (Local Rule 144(a)) 17 18 19 XAVIER BECERRA, et al., Defendants. Courtroom: Judge: Trial Date: Action Filed: 5, 14th Floor Hon. William B. Shubb None Set April 28, 2017 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (2:17-cv-00903-WBS-KJN) 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 Plaintiffs William Wiese, Jeremiah Morris, Lance Cowley, Sherman Macaston, Adam Richards, Clifford Flores, L.Q. Dang, Frank Federeau, Alan Normandy, Todd Nielsen, the Calguns Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, and Second Amendment Foundation (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), and Defendants Attorney General Xavier Becerra, in his official capacity, and Acting Chief Martha Supernor (collectively, “Defendants,” and together with Plaintiffs, the “Parties”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: WHEREAS, on April 28, 2017, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief; WHEREAS, on May 22, 2017, the parties stipulated to and Defendants filed a stipulation for an extension of time to respond to the originally-filed complaint; WHEREAS, on June 5, 2017, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief; WHEREAS, on June 12, 2017 Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which was renewed and refiled on June 14, 2017; WHEREAS, Defendants’ last day to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint currently is June 20, 2017; WHEREAS, in the interest of efficiency and economy, the Parties agree that Defendants’ time to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint should be extended until after the resolution of the Motion for Preliminary Injunction; WHEREAS, no previous extensions have been sought since the filing of Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint; THEREFORE, pursuant to Local Rule 144 (a) and in consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby stipulated that: Defendant’s last day to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint shall be no later than 21 days after entry of this Court’s order regarding the Motion for Preliminary Injunction. 28 2 Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (2:17-cv-00903-WBS-KJN) 1 Dated: June 15, 2017 Respectfully submitted, 2 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California TAMAR PACHTER Supervising Deputy Attorney General JOHN D. ECHEVERRIA Deputy Attorney General 3 4 5 6 /s/ Alexandra Robert Gordon ALEXANDRA ROBERT GORDON Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants 7 8 Dated: June 15, 2017 Seiler Epstein Ziegler & Applegate LLP 9 10 11 /s/ George M. Lee GEORGE M. LEE Attorneys for Plaintiffs 12 13 14 15 HAVING CONSIDERED THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS SO ORDERED: 16 17 Dated: June 16, 2017 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (2:17-cv-00903-WBS-KJN)

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?