Garcia-Lopez et al v. Aytes et al

Filing 26

ORDER RE: 25 DENYING STIPULATION AS UNNECESSARY. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 4/7/10. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/7/2010)

*E-Filed 4/7/10* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 counsel is experiencing a heavy caseload, Plaintiffs' counsel respectfully requests that due date 25 26 27 28
Stipulation to Extend Deadline; [Proposed] Order No. 3:09-cv-2592 RS

Robert B. Jobe (Cal. State Bar #133089) LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT B. JOBE 550 Kearny St., Ste. 200 San Francisco, CA 94108 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Attorney for Plaintiffs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TANIA GARCIA-LOPEZ ET AL.,

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) MICHAEL AYTES, ET AL., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ____________________________________)

No.

3:09-cv-2592 RS

STIPULATION TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO THE DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO THE CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING STIPULATION AS Date: June 10, 2010 Time: 1:30 p.m. Honorable Richard Seeborg
UNNECESSARY

Plaintiffs, by and through their attorney of record, and Defendants, by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate, subject to the approval of the Court, to extend the deadline for Plaintiffs' reply to the Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Cross Motion for Summary Judgment, currently set for April 16, 2010, on the following grounds: 1. Defendants filed an Opposition to Plaintiffs' Cross Motion for Summary

Judgment on April 2, 2010. Plaintiffs' reply to that motion is currently due on April 16, 2010, and the hearing on both motions is set for June 10, 2010 at 1:30 p.m. 2. Because the hearing on these motions is not until June, and because Plaintiffs'

for the reply be extended to May 14, 2010. 3. Defendants' counsel has indicated that he has no opposition to resetting the

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

briefing schedule as set forth below. 4. Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that, pursuant to their stipulation, the

Court reset the deadline for Plaintiffs' Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' CrossMotion for Summary Judgment as follows: Plaintiffs' Reply to Opposition to Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment: 5/14/2010

Dated: April 7, 2010

Respectfully submitted, /s/ Robert B. Jobe ROBERT B. JOBE Attorney for Plaintiffs

Dated: April 7, 2010 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 26 27 28
Stipulation to Extend Deadline; [Proposed] Order No. 3:09-cv-2592 RS

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO United States Attorney TONY WEST United States Attorney Assistant Attorney General JOSHUA E. BRAUNSTEIN Assistant Director /s/ Jonathan D. Wasden _________________________________________ JONATHAN D. WASDEN Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Civil Division Attorneys for Defendants

[PROPOSED] ORDER
The Parties' rsuant to stipulation, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the deadline for Plaintiffs' Reply Pu stipulation is DENIED as unnecessary. The briefing schedule is to be calculated from the continued hearing date. See Civil Local Rule 7-7(d).

to Defendants' Opposition to Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment be reset as follows: Plaintiffs' Reply to Opposition to Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment: 5/14/2010

Dated:

April 7, 2010

_______________________________ RICHARD SEEBORG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE