Weaver, et al v. City of Stockton, et al.,

Filing 53

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 05/06/22 GRANTING Defendants a 5 day extension of time, through and including 05/17/22 to file their Reply on the MSJ. Defendants have a 1 day extension of time, through and including 05/17/22 to file their Opposition to the Countermotion.(Licea Chavez, V)

1

6

DANA A. SUNTAG (State Bar #125127)
JOSHUA J. STEVENS (State Bar # 238105)
HERUM\CRABTREE\SUNTAG
A California Professional Corporation
5757 Pacific Avenue, Suite 222
Stockton, California 95207
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

7

Attorneys for All Defendants

2
3
4
5

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JAMES WEAVER, JR., et al.,

12

Plaintiffs,

13

vs.

14

CITY OF STOCKTON, et al.,

15
16
17
18
19
20
21

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:20-CV-00990-JAM-JDP
STIPULATION TO EXTEND
DEFENDANTS’ DEADLINE TO:
(i) FILE REPLY ON MSJ; AND
(ii) FILE OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’
COUNTERMOTION;
ORDER
Date: May 31, 2022
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Courtroom: 6
Judge: Hon. John A. Mendez

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME ON REPLY ON MSJ AND ON OPPOSITION TO COUNTERMOTION

1

This Stipulation is entered into all parties, through their counsel of record.

2
3

RECITALS
A.

On April 1, 2022, all Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, or,

4

alternatively, partial summary judgment (the “MSJ”), set for hearing, per the Court’s Scheduling

5

Order, on May 17, 2022.

6
7
8

B.

Pursuant to Rules 230(c) and (e) of the Local Rules, amended effective March 1,

2022, Plaintiffs’ Opposition to the MSJ and any countermotion were due by April 15, 2022.
C.

On May 2, 2022, Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to the MSJ and a Countermotion

9

to exclude certain testimony. Plaintiffs also filed an Ex Parte Application asking the Court to

10

excuse the late filing of their Opposition to the MSJ (which they erroneously labeled as an “Ex

11

Parte Application to Strike Defendants’ Reply for Being Untimely”).

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

D.

On May 3, 2022, the Court sua sponte issued a minute order continuing the

hearings on the MSJ and Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application to May 31, 2022.
E.

On May 4, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a Request for Judicial Notice in further

opposition to the MSJ.
F.

Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c), Defendants’ Reply on the MSJ is due on May 12,

2022, and pursuant to Rule 230(e), Defendants’ Opposition to the Countermotion is due on
May 16, 2022.
G.

Because of the additional time Plaintiffs had before filing their Reply on the MSJ

and their Countermotion, counsel for Defendants asked counsel for Plaintiffs if she would
stipulate that Defendants can have additional time to file both their Reply on the MSJ and their
Opposition to the Countermotion up to May 17, 2022, which is 14 days before the May 31, 2022,
hearing, which would have the effect of granting Defendants an extra five days to file their Reply
on the MSJ and an extra one day to file their Opposition to the Countermotion.
H. Plaintiffs’ counsel consented to Defendants’ request for additional time.

27
28

1
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME ON REPLY ON MSJ AND ON OPPOSITION TO COUNTERMOTION

1
2
3
4
5
6

STIPULATION
IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED, by the parties, through their counsel of record, as
follows:
1.

Defendants have a five day extension of time, through and including May 17,

2022, to file their Reply on the MSJ; and
2.

Defendants have a one day extension of time, through and including May 17,

7

2022, to file their Opposition to the Countermotion.

8

Dated: May 6, 2022

9

By: /s/ Joshua J. Stevens
JOSHUA J. STEVENS
Attorneys for All Defendants

10
11
12
13

Dated: May 6, 2022

15
16

18
19
20
21
22

LAW OFFICES OF YOLANDA HUANG
By: /s/ Yolanda Huang_____
YOLANDA HUANG
Attorneys for All Plaintiffs

14

17

HERUM/CRABTREE/SUNTAG
A California Professional Corporation

ORDER
The Court has reviewed and considered the parties’ Stipulation. Good cause appearing
therefor, IT IS ORDERED that the relief requested in the Stipulation is GRANTED, as follows:
1.

Defendants have a five-day extension of time, through and including May 17,

2022, to file their Reply on the MSJ; and
2.

Defendants have a one-day extension of time, through and including May 17,

2022, to file their Opposition to the Countermotion.

23
24
25
26

Dated: May 6, 2022

/s/ John A. Mendez
THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

27
28

2
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME ON REPLY ON MSJ AND ON OPPOSITION TO COUNTERMOTION