Pacific Coast Horseshoeing School, Inc. et al v. Grafilo, et al
Filing
12
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/06/17 ORDERING that Defendants' last day to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint shall be no later than 12/22/2017. The Parties shall confer as required by FRCP 26(f) and prepare and submit a joint status report that includes the FRCP 26(f) discovery plan by 1/12/2018. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
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
P. PATTY LI, State Bar No. 266937
Deputy Attorney General
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004
Telephone: (415) 703-1577
Fax: (415) 703-1234
E-mail: Patty.Li@doj.ca.gov
Attorneys for Defendants Dean Grafilo and Michael
Marion, in their official capacities
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SACRAMENTO DIVISION
11
12
13
PACIFIC COAST HORSESHOEING
SCHOOL, INC., et al.,
14
15
v.
2:17-cv-02217-JAM-GGH
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE
Plaintiffs, EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER OR
OTHERWISE RESPOND TO
COMPLAINT
16
Judge:
The Hon. John A. Mendez
Action Filed: October 23, 2017
GRAFILO, et al.,
17
Defendants.
18
19
Plaintiffs Pacific Coast Horseshoeing School, Inc., Bob Smith, and Esteban Narez
20
21
(“Plaintiffs”), and Defendants Dean Grafilo, in his official capacity as Director of Consumer
22
Affairs; and Michael Marion, in his official capacity as Chief of the Bureau for Private and
23
Postsecondary Education (“Defendants,” and collectively with Plaintiffs, the “Parties”), by and
24
through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
25
WHEREAS, on October 23, 2017, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint;
26
WHEREAS, on October 24, 2017, Plaintiffs served their Complaint and summons on
27
Defendants;
28
//
1
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (2:17-cv-02217-JAM-GGH)
1
2
3
4
5
6
WHEREAS, pursuant to stipulation (ECF No. 10), the last day to answer or otherwise
respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint currently is December 12, 2017;
WHEREAS, the Parties are engaged in settlement discussions and hope to resolve this
matter forthwith;
WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed that Defendants’ time to answer or otherwise respond
to the Complaint shall be extended by 10 days from the stipulated filing deadline;
7
WHEREAS, one previous extension of time has been sought;
8
WHEREAS, the Court’s Order Requiring Joint Status Report (ECF No. 3) provides that the
9
Parties shall confer as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) and prepare and submit a
10
joint status report that includes the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) discovery plan within
11
sixty days of service of the Complaint, which is December 26, 2017;
12
THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby stipulated that:
13
1.
14
15
Defendants’ last day to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ Complaint shall be
no later than December 22, 2017.
2.
The Parties shall confer as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) and
16
prepare and submit a joint status report that includes the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f)
17
discovery plan by January 12, 2018.
18
19
Dated: December 6, 2017
Respectfully submitted,
XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
TAMAR PACHTER
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
20
21
22
23
/s/ P. Patty Li
P. PATTY LI
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendants Dean Grafilo and
Michael Marion, in their official capacities
24
25
26
27
28
2
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (2:17-cv-02217-JAM-GGH)
1
Dated: December 6, 2017
INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE
2
3
/s/ Keith Diggs
KEITH DIGGS
Attorney for Plaintiffs
4
5
6
7
HAVING CONSIDERED THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, AND GOOD CAUSE
8
APPEARING, IT IS SO ORDERED:
9
10
Dated: 12/6/2017
/s/ John A. Mendez___
11
Hon. John A. Mendez
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order (2:17-cv-02217-JAM-GGH)
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?