Electronic Frontier Foundation v. Department of Justice
Filing
70
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 69 TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE FOR PARTIES' RENEWED CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Motion Hearing set for 5/30/2013 01:30 PM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 4/22/13. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/22/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Jennifer Lynch (SBN 240701)
jlynch@eff.org
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
815 Eddy Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
Telephone: (415) 436-9333
Facsimile: (415) 436-9993
David L. Sobel (pro hac vice)
sobel@eff.org
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
1818 N Street, N.W., Suite 410
Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: (202) 797-9009 x104
Facsimile: (202) 707-9066
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Electronic Frontier Foundation
12
13
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
)
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION, ) Case No. 4:10-cv-04892-RS
)
Plaintiff,
)
) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
v.
) ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING
) DATE FOR PARTIES’ RENEWED
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
) CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY
) JUDGMENT
Defendant.
)
) [Civ. L.R. 6-2]
)
) Date:
April 25, 2013
) Time:
2:30 p.m.
) Place:
Ctrm. 3, 17th Floor
) Judge:
Hon. Richard Seeborg
)
)
)
26
27
28
Case No. CV-10-04892-RS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE FOR PARTIES’
RENEWED CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
1
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1) and Civil L.R. 6-2, the parties, by and through
2
undersigned counsel, have conferred and hereby stipulate to and respectfully request the Court
3
grant a continuance to the hearing date for the parties’ Renewed Cross Motions for Summary
4
Judgment. The hearing date is currently scheduled for Thursday, April 25, 2013, and the parties
5
request the hearing be continued to Thursday, May 30, 2013.
6
The parties seek this continuance because Plaintiff’s counsel’s grandmother passed away
7
today, and plaintiff’s counsel needs to travel to be with family and to help her family with the
8
logistics surrounding her grandmother’s death. Defendant’s counsel’s schedule is full with other
9
matters throughout the month of May, and so May 30, 2013 is the first date both counsel will be
10
available.
11
This requested change will minimally affect the present schedule for the case because the
12
Renewed Cross Motions are fully briefed and because it will only extend the hearing date by about
13
a month.
14
DATED: April 19, 2013
Respectfully submitted,
15
/s/ Jennifer Lynch
Jennifer Lynch
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
815 Eddy Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
Telephone: (415) 436-9333
Facsimile: (415) 436-9993
16
17
18
19
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
20
26
/s/ Nicholas Cartier
(with permission)
NICHOLAS CARTIER
Trial Attorney, Federal Programs Branch
Civil Division, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
20 Massachusetts Ave NW, 7224
PO Box 883 (US Mail)
Washington, DC 20530
Tel: 202-616-8351
Fax: 202-616-8470
email: nicholas.cartier@usdoj.gov
27
Attorneys for Defendants
21
DATED: April 19, 2013
22
23
24
25
28
Case No. CV-10-04892-RS
1
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE
FOR PARTIES’ RENEWED CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
1
DECLARATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 5-1
2
I, Jennifer Lynch, hereby declare pursuant to Local Rule 5-1 that I have obtained
3
Defendant’s concurrence in the filing of this document from Nicholas Cartier, Counsel for
4
Defendant.
5
Executed on April 19, 2013, in San Francisco, California.
6
/s/ Jennifer Lynch
Jennifer Lynch
7
8
9
*
10
*
*
*
*
*
*
11
12
13
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
15
4/22/13
Dated: ______________
The Hon. RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. CV-10-04892-RS
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE
FOR PARTIES’ RENEWED CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
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?