Smith et al v. City of Oakland et al

Filing 166

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES ON APPEAL IN THE DISTRICT COURT BY 9/14/10 re 165 Stipulation filed by Patricia Gray, Torry Smith. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/20/10. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/20/2010)

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 28

JOHN L. BURRIS (SBN 69888) BENJAMIN NISENBAUM (SBN 222173) ADANTE DE POINTER (SBN 236229) LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS Airport Corporate Centre 7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1120 Oakland, California 94621 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] JAMES B. CHANIN (SBN 76043) JULIE M. HOUK (SBN 114968) LAW OFFICES OF JAMES B. CHANIN 3050 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley, California 94705 Telephone: [phone], Ext. 2 Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA TORRY SMITH, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. CITY OF OAKLAND; et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO.: C05-04045 EMC STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFFS TO FILE MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES ON APPEAL IN THE DISTRICT COURT

1 Smith., et al. v. City of Oakland, et al., Case No. C05-04045 EMC Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending Time to File Motion for Appellate Fees

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 28

THE PARTIES, BY AND THROUGH THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD DO HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: Whereas, the parties are continuing to meet and confer in good faith with respect to the issues concerning the attorneys' fees incurred by Plaintiffs on appeal; Whereas, counsel for Defendants has requested additional time to respond to Plaintiffs' demand for attorneys' fees on appeal; and, Whereas, the parties have previously stipulated to the transfer of the determination of Plaintiffs' fees on appeal to the District Court and for an extension of time of sixty days to file a motion for the appellate fees in the Ninth Circuit; THE PARTIES DO HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE THAT Plaintiffs shall have up to an including September 14, 2010 to file a motion for an award of attorneys' fees on appeal in the District Court. This stipulation is not intended to alter the stipulation previously reached between the parties concerning the time for the filing of Plaintiffs' motion for an award of the attorneys fees incurred in the District Court. IT IS SO ORDERED:

Dated: July 13, 2010

_____/S/____________________________ Julie M. Houk Attorney for Plaintiffs ____/S/_____________________________ Terence J. Cassidy Attorney for Defendants

Dated: July 16, 2010

2 Smith., et al. v. City of Oakland, et al., Case No. C05-04045 EMC Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending Time to File Motion for Appellate Fees

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 28 7/20 Dated: ____________, 2010

[PROPOSED] ORDER PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, AND FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, IT IS SO ORDERED:

UNIT ED

ER

N

F D IS T IC T O R

A

C

LI

FO
3

Edward M. Chen Magistrate Judge . Chen United Statesge Edward M District Court Jud

Smith., et al. v. City of Oakland, et al., Case No. C05-04045 EMC Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending Time to File Motion for Appellate Fees

R NIA

D RDERE IS SO O IT _______________________________
NO

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

RT U O

RT

H