Davis v. Barnhart et al
STIPULATION AND ORDER regarding discovery and further briefing schedules; Signed by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel on 11/16/2010. (awb, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2010)
Davis v. Barnhart et al
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MELINDA HAAG (SBN 132612) United States Attorney JOANN M. SWANSON (SBN 88143) Chief, Civil Division MICHAEL T. PYLE (SBN 172954) Assistant United States Attorney 150 Almaden Blvd., Suite 900 San Jose, California 95113 Telephone: (408) 535-5087 Facsimile: (408) 535-5081 Email: email@example.com Attorneys for Federal Defendant
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TERRENCE DAVIS, Steven Bruce, Esq., Legal Director (CBN 70300) People With Disabilities Foundation 507 Polk Street, Suite 430 San Francisco, CA 94102 Tel (415) 931-3070 Fax (415) 931-2828 firstname.lastname@example.org Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of ) Social Security ) ) Defendant. ) ) ____________________________________) ) JOHN DOE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) v. ) ) MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of ) Social Security ) ) Defendant. ) ) No. C 06-6108 MHP No. C 09-980 MHP E-FILING CASE STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY AND FURTHER BRIEFING SCHEDULE
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 2011.
Pursuant to the Court's instructions at the hearing on Plaintiffs' Motions for Partial Summary Judgment on November 1, 2010 and subject to the approval of the Court, the parties hereby submit this Stipulation and Order regarding a schedule for further briefing and discovery as follows: 1. The parties agree that any further discovery and summary judgment briefing
should be bifurcated into two phases. The parties agree that discovery and briefing in the first phase shall focus on the following issues: (i) that Plaintiffs lack standing to bring their claims; (ii) that Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations; and (iii) that the Court lacks jurisdiction to award Plaintiffs' requested remedies (collectively, "First Phase Issues"). In the second phase, the parties agree that discovery and summary judgment briefing should focus on Plaintiffs' requested remedies and whether the requested remedies constitute an undue burden or a fundamental alteration on Defendant. 2. As to the first phase, discovery regarding First Phase Issues will close on January
28, 2011 for all parties. 3. Regarding such discovery, the parties agree that Defendant will take the
deposition of each Plaintiff. The parties also agree that the following accommodations should be made for each Plaintiff: (i) the depositions shall not take place in the U.S. Attorney's Office but in a room elsewhere in the federal building; (ii) each Plaintiff shall be entitled to be accompanied by counsel as well as an individual of their choosing who can provide psychological support but shall not interfere with the examination; and (iii) each Plaintiff will be entitled to take as many breaks as necessary with the understanding that each Plaintiff's need for breaks might mean that their deposition may not be completed in a single a day. 4. 25, 2011. 5. Plaintiffs shall file an opposition brief addressing First Phase Issues on March 18, Defendant shall file an opening brief addressing First Phase Issues on February
Defendant shall file a reply brief addressing First Phase Issues on April 1, 2011. A hearing on the briefing specified above shall take place on April 18, 2011 at
S T I P U L A T I O N AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE, 2 C 09-980 MHP; 06-6108 MHP
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
2:00 p.m. or such other time as the Court may set. 8. With respect to the second phase, which shall focus on Plaintiffs' requested
remedies and whether the requested remedies constitute an undue burden or a fundamental alteration on Defendant, the parties agree that it would be premature to propose a schedule for discovery and briefing until the Court rules on the First Phase Issues. However, the parties agree to meet and confer regarding such a schedule immediately following a ruling or further guidance from the Court regarding the First Phase Issues. 9. The parties reserve their right to seek enlargements of time, as may be required.
Respectfully submitted, MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney Dated: November 15, 2010 ___________/s/_________________ MICHAEL T. PYLE Assistant United States Attorney
Dated: November 15, 2010
_______/s/____________________ STEVEN F. BRUCE Attorney for Plaintiffs
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED: 21 The Court, having considered the stipulation of the parties, approves the schedule set 22 forth above. 23 24 25 26 27 DATED:____________________ 11/16/2010
S DISTRICT TE C TA ___________________________________
RT U O
HONORABLE MARILYNRED PATEL HALL U.S. DISTRICT O ORDE COURT JUDGE SS
rilyn H dge Ma . Patel
F D IS T IC T O STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE, R
C 09-980 MHP; 06-6108 MHP
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?