Pickard v. Department of Justice

Filing 149

ORDER re 147 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Regarding Summary Judgment Briefing Schedule filed by William Leonard Pickard. Hearing set for 7/13/2012 is vacated. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 4/25/2012. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2012)

Case3:06-cv-00185-CRB Document147 Filed04/23/12 Page1 of 4

1
2
3
4

MARK RUMOLD, ESQ. (SBN 279060)
901 Cortland Ave., Apt B
San Francisco, CA 94110
[phone]
[e-mail]
Attorney for Plaintiff
William Pickard

5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11

WILLIAM LEONARD PICKARD,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

15

Defendant.

16

Case No.: 3:06-cv-00185-CRB
STIPULATION REGARDING
SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Hon. Charles R. Breyer
Ctrm. 6, 17th Floor

Subject to the approval of the Court, the parties hereby stipulate to modify the summary

17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

judgment briefing schedule and set a hearing date as follows:

19

On March 30, 2012, Defendant filed its third motion for summary judgment. (Dkt.

20

No. 140).1 In conjunction with its third motion for summary judgment, Defendant filed an

21

Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (the “Administrative Motion”). (Dkt. No. 142). The

22

Administrative Motion sought this Court’s permission to file under seal Defendant’s Vaughn

23

Index. By request of Defendant and pursuant to a subsequent stipulation by the parties, Plaintiff

24

agreed to waive his right to service of the Vaughn index, pending this Court’s resolution of the

25

Administrative Motion. (Dkt. No. 143). On April 3, 2012, Plaintiff filed his opposition to

26

Defendant’s Administrative Motion. (Dkt. No. 146). The Administrative Motion remains pending.

27

1

28

Defendant’s third motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 140) was referred to in Dkt.
No. 139 as Defendant’s second motion for summary judgment.
1
STIPULATION REGARDING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
No. 3:06-cv-00185-CRB

Case3:06-cv-00185-CRB Document147 Filed04/23/12 Page2 of 4

1

If the Court grants the Administrative Motion, the parties have stipulated that Defendant

2

will serve the Vaughn index on Plaintiff, subject to the Court’s sealing order. (Dkt. No. 143.) If

3

the Court denies the Administrative Motion in full, then Defendant has the option of not making

4

the Vaughn index part of the record in this case, or, within 4 days, resubmitting the Vaughn index

5

for filing in the public record. See Civil L.R. 79-5(e). If the Court denies in part and grants in part

6

the Administrative Motion, then Defendant may resubmit the Vaughn index in a manner that

7

conforms to the Court’s Order and Civil L.R. 79-5(e). See id.

8
9

Plaintiff’s deadline for filing his cross-motion for summary judgment and opposition to
Defendant’s third motion for summary judgment is currently April 30, 2012. (Dkt. No. 139).

10

However, pending a ruling on the Administrative Motion, because it is currently undetermined

11

whether the Vaughn index will be part of the record in this case (whether filed under seal or not),

12

and because Plaintiff currently lacks access to the Vaughn index, Plaintiff is unable to fully prepare

13

his opposition and cross-motion at this time.

14
15
16

Accordingly, the parties have stipulated to modify the briefing schedule and hearing date as
follows:
1.

The deadline for filing Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment and

17

opposition to Defendant’s third motion for summary judgment will be thirty (30)

18

days after the date of this Court’s Order resolving defendant’s Administrative

19

Motion.

20

2.

Thirty (30) days after the filing of Plaintiff’s cross-motion and opposition,

21

Defendant’s reply brief and opposition to Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary

22

judgment will be due.

23

3.

24
25

Fifteen (15) days after the filing of Defendant’s reply and opposition, Plaintiff’s
reply brief will be due.

4.

The current hearing date of July 13, 2012, is hereby vacated. After the Court files

26

its Order resolving Defendant’s Administrative Motion, the parties will file a

27

stipulation and proposed order setting a new hearing date. The hearing will be

28

2

STIPULATION REGARDING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
No. 3:06-cv-00185-CRB

Case3:06-cv-00185-CRB Document147 Filed04/23/12 Page3 of 4

1

scheduled for no less than thirty (30) days after the filing of Plaintiff’s reply, on a

2

date that is available to the Court and mutually agreed upon by the parties.

3

Respectfully submitted,

4
5

Dated: April 23, 2012

By:

_/s/ Mark Rumold___
MARK RUMOLD
Attorney for Plaintiff

6
7

MELINDA HAAG
United States Attorney

8
9

Dated: April 23, 2012
By:

/s/ Neill Tseng (by permission)
NEILL T. TSENG
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorney for Defendant

10
11
12

*

*

*

*

*

13
DECLARATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45, § X.B

14
15
16
17
18

I, Mark Rumold, hereby declare pursuant to General Order 45, § X.B that I have obtained
Defendants’ concurrence in the filing of this document from Neill T. Tseng, Counsel for
Defendant.
Executed on April 23, 2012, in San Francisco, California.

19

/s/ Mark Rumold
Mark Rumold

20
*

21
22

*

*

*

*

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

23
24
25

DATED: _______________
April 25, 2012

_________________________________
HONORABLE CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

26
27
28

3

STIPULATION REGARDING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
No. 3:06-cv-00185-CRB