National Federation of the Blind et al v. Target Corporation

Filing 50

First MOTION Leave to File Surreply Brief filed by Target Corporation. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1# 2 Exhibit Exhibit 2# 3 Exhibit Exhibit 3)(Naeve, Robert) (Filed on 7/18/2006)

National Federation of the Blind et al v. Target Corporation

Doc. 50

Case 3:06-cv-01802-MHP

Document 50

Filed 07/18/2006

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

ROBERT A. NAEVE (CA SBN 106095) [e-mail] MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 19900 MacArthur Blvd. Irvine, California 92612-2445 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 949.251.0900 DAVID F. MCDOWELL (CA SBN 125806) SARVENAZ BAHAR (CA SBN 171556) MICHAEL J. BOSTROM (CA SBN 211778) [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 555 West Fifth Street, Suite 3500 Los Angeles, California 90013-1024 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] STUART C. PLUNKETT (CA SBN 187971) [e-mail] MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105-2482 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant TARGET CORPORATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND, the NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF CALIFORNIA, on behalf of their members, and Bruce F. Sexton, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, Case No. C06-01802 MHP

23 v. 24 TARGET CORPORATION, 25 Defendant. 26 27 28

DEFENDANT TARGET CORPORATION'S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE SURREPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [Local Rule 7-11]

TARGET'S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE SURREPLY BRIEF (Case No. 06-01802 MHP)
la-868832
Dockets.Justia.com

Case 3:06-cv-01802-MHP

Document 50

Filed 07/18/2006

Page 2 of 3

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

Defendant Target Corporation ("Target") seeks leave to file the surreply brief attached hereto as Exhibit 1, as well as the two supporting declarations attached as Exhibits 2 and 3. The surreply is in support of Target's opposition to the motion for preliminary injunction filed by Plaintiffs National Federation of the Blind, the National Federation of the Blind of California and Bruce Sexton (jointly, "NFB"). Target is mindful of the fact that surreply briefs are ordinarily disfavored. But here, the parties, by agreement and with leave of the Court, conducted depositions of the witnesses who submitted declarations in support of Target's opposition to the motion for preliminary injunction. NFB has thus submitted new evidence in its reply brief that was not available to the parties at the time the opposition was filed. The surreply brief addresses only the new evidence submitted by NFB. The surreply brief is thus warranted and would assist the Court in resolving NFB's motion. See Pfohl v. Farmers Ins. Group, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6447 at *4 (C.D. Cal. March 1, 2004) (defendant permitted to file surreply where plaintiff submitted new evidence and raised new argument in reply); Fedrick v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 366 F. Supp. 2d 1190, 1197 (N.D. Ga. 2005) (allowing surreply "where a valid reason for such additional briefing exists, such as where the movant raises new arguments in its reply brief"); Murray v. TXU Corp., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10298 at *4 (N.D. Tex. May 27, 2005) (surreply appropriate "when the movant raises new legal theories or attempts to present new evidence at the reply stage"). Target is also mindful of the fact that the hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction is set in less than one week. Target filed this motion for administrative relief within two business days after NFB filed a notice of errata regarding citations in its reply brief (which it did after Target notified NFB that certain citations appeared to be incorrect). Target thus acted with diligence in preparing and seeking leave to file a surreply.

TARGET'S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE SURREPLY BRIEF (Case No. 06-01802 MHP)
la-868832

1

Case 3:06-cv-01802-MHP

Document 50

Filed 07/18/2006

Page 3 of 3

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

NFB opposes this motion. Respectfully submitted, Dated: June 18, 2006 ROBERT A. NAEVE DAVID F. MCDOWELL STUART C. PLUNKETT SARVENAZ BAHAR MICHAEL J. BOSTROM MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

By:

/s/ Robert A. Naeve Attorneys for Defendant TARGET CORPORATION

TARGET'S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE SURREPLY BRIEF (Case No. 06-01802 MHP)
la-868832

2