Allen, et al v. City of Oakland, et al

Filing 748

ORDER GRANTING 747 Administrative Motion for Relief from General Order No. 62. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 10/04/2012. (tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/4/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 JOHN L. BURRIS, STATE BAR NO. 69888 Law Offices of John L. Burris Airport Corporate Centre 7677 Oakport Road, Suite 1120 Oakland, California 94621 Telephone: 510.839.5200 Facsimile: 510.839.3882 5 6 10 JAMES B. CHANIN, STATE BAR NO. 76043 JULIE M. HOUK, STATE BAR NO. 114968 Law Offices of James B. Chanin 3050 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley, California 94705 Telephone: 510.848.4752 Facsimile: 510.848.5819 11 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 7 8 9 12 13 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 16 17 DELPHINE ALLEN; et al; 18 MASTER CASE NO. C-00-4599 TEH Plaintiffs, ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM GENERAL ORDER NO. 62 RE: EFILING SEALED DOCUMENTS AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 19 20 vs. 21 22 23 Hearing Date: December 13, 2012 Time: 10:00 a.m. Courtroom: 2, 17th Floor The Honorable Thelton E. Henderson CITY OF OAKLAND, et al., Defendants. IT IS SO ORDERED AS MODIFIED 24 25 26 27 28 1 Allen v. City of Oakland, Case No. C00-4599 TEH Relief from General Order No. 62 re Filing Sealed Documents 1 RATIVE MOTION AND DECLARATION OF PLAIN 2 3 I, JULIE M. HOUK, DECLARE: 4 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California and am one of the 5 attorneys representing the Plaintiffs in the within action. I have personal knowledge of the matters 6 stated herein and would testify to the same if called to do so in Court. 7 8 2. s scheduled to take place on December 13, 2012. 9 10 4. Plaintiffs currently have in in excess of 70 exhibits that will be filed in support of this 11 motion and anticipate that it will require a significant amount of time, including after normal hours to 12 complete the efiling. 13 5. A small number of the moving papers require redactions pursuant to the standing 14 protective order in this case and/or must be sealed pursuant to other orders of this Court, such as DKT 15 Nos. 577 and 712. 16 17 6. Plaintiffs are asking for relief from the requirements of General Order 62 and instead, allow Plaintiffs to file and serve their motion papers as follows: 18 a. Allow Plaintiffs to file their redacted moving papers via efiling on October 4, 2012; 19 b. Allow Plaintiffs to email the unredacted version of the moving papers 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 counsel on October 4, 2012; and, c. Allow Plaintiffs to send the sealed, unredacted copy of their moving papers and chambers copy of the redacted version to the Court via overnight mail on October 4, 2012. 7. I declare that the foregoing is true and correct under penalty of perjury. Executed this 4th day of October 2012, at Dublin, NH. . ___________/S/___________________________ Julie M. Houk Attorney for Plaintiffs 27 28 2 Allen v. City of Oakland, Case No. C00-4599 TEH Relief from General Order No. 62 re Filing Sealed Documents 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 Having considered the Administrative Motion of Plaintiffs and for good cause shown, 3 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT . 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. P 5 J RT 11 H ER 12 13 R NIA n rso . Hende helton E udge T NO 10 D DERE _______________________________ SO OR ED IT I E. Thelton S Henderson DIFI AS MO Judge of the United States District Court FO 9 4 Dated: October __, 2012 LI 8 A 7 S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O S October 4, 2012. UNIT ED 6 N F D IS T IC T O R C 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Allen v. City of Oakland, Case No. C00-4599 TEH Relief from General Order No. 62 re Filing Sealed Documents

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?