Committee on Jobs Candidate Advocacy Fund et al v. Herrera et al

Filing 64

ORDER GRANTING Request to Extend Stay re 63 Status Report. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on June 25, 2010. (jswlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/25/2010)

Case3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document63

Filed06/25/10 Page1 of 5

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

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669 City Attorney WAYNE SNODGRASS, State Bar #148137 JONATHAN GIVNER, State Bar #208000 Deputy City Attorney City Hall, Room 234 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place San Francisco, California 94102-4682 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-Mail: [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP FREDERICK K. LOWELL #66641 BRUCE A. ERICSON #76342 [e-mail] ANITA D. STEARNS MAYO #142749 MARC H. AXELBAUM #209855 [e-mail] 50 Fremont Street Post Office Box 7880 San Francisco, CA 94120-7880 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA COMMITTEE ON JOBS CANDIDATE ADVOCACY FUND, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. DENNIS J. HERRERA, in his official capacity as City Attorney of the City and County of San Francisco, et al. Defendants. Case No. C07-3199 JSW JOINT STATUS REPORT; [PROPOSED] ORDER

JOINT STATUS REPORT; [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. C07-3199 JSW

Case3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document63

Filed06/25/10 Page2 of 5

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

JOINT STATUS REPORT Pursuant to the Joint Status Report and the Order filed May 13, 2010 (Dkt. 62), Plaintiffs Committee on JOBS Candidate Advocacy Fund and Building Owners and Managers Association of San Francisco Independent Expenditure PAC (collectively, "Plaintiffs"), and Defendants Dennis J. Herrera, Kamala D. Harris, the Ethics Commission of the City and County of San Francisco, and the City and County of San Francisco (collectively, "Defendants"), jointly file this Status Report. In this case, Plaintiffs contend that Sections 1.114(c)(1) and 1.114(c)(2) of the San Francisco Campaign Finance Reform Ordinance ("CFRO"), codified in the San Francisco Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code, and Regulation 1.114-2 of the Regulations to the CFRO, violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution by imposing limits on contributions to political committees for the purpose of making independent expenditures. The Court granted Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction on September 20, 2007 (Dkt. 37), and that order has remained in effect since then pursuant to a series of stipulated orders. At the parties' request, the Court has stayed the litigation while the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered a case presenting similar issues, Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce et al. v. City of Long Beach ("Long Beach," USCA Dkt. 07-55691). As described in the parties' May 12, 2010 status report (Dkt. 61), the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in Long Beach this April, holding that the contribution limit in that case was unconstitutional as applied to some of the plaintiffs, and that the remaining plaintiff lacked standing to challenge the law. See 603 F.3d 684 (9th Cir. 2010). In light of the Ninth Circuit's decision, counsel for Plaintiffs and Defendants are exploring potential settlement of this matter. The parties had hoped to have concluded settlement discussions by mid-June, but require additional time. The parties continue to believe that settlement discussions could be fruitful, and have agreed that an extension of the current stay until August 20, 2010 will allow them sufficient time to pursue the possibility of settlement. For that reason, the parties agree that it would be most efficient and would best preserve the interests of judicial economy to continue the current stay. Subject to agreement by this Court, the parties agree that, by August 20, 2010, they will meet and confer to discuss how best to proceed with
JOINT STATUS REPORT; [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. C07-3199 JSW

1

Case3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document63

Filed06/25/10 Page3 of 5

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

this case and submit a joint status report or request for a case management conference. The parties agree that no case management conference is necessary at this time.

Dated: June 25, 2010 DENNIS J. HERRERA City Attorney WAYNE SNODGRASS JONATHAN GIVNER TARA M. STEELEY Deputy City Attorneys By: /s/ Jonathan Givner JONATHAN GIVNER Attorneys for Defendants

Dated: June 25, 2010 PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP FREDERICK K. LOWELL BRUCE A. ERICSON ANITA D. STERNS MAYO MARC H. AXELBAUM *By: /s/ Marc H. Axelbaum MARC H. AXELBAUM Attorneys for Plaintiffs *Pursuant to GO 45, the electronic signatory has obtained approval from this signatory.

JOINT STATUS REPORT; [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. C07-3199 JSW

2

Case3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document63

Filed06/25/10 Page5 of 5

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 June 25, 2010 Dated: __________________

[PROPOSED] ORDER Pursuant to the agreement of the parties set forth in the foregoing Joint Status Report, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. 37) and the Stipulation and Order Staying Litigation entered by the Court on October 26, 2007 (Dkt. 51) shall remain in effect. 2. By August 20, 2010, the parties shall meet and confer and submit a joint status report or request for a case management conference. IT IS SO ORDERED.

________ _________________________ Hon. Jeffrey S. White United States District Judge

JOINT STATUS REPORT; [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO. C07-3199 JSW

4