De Abadia-Peixoto et al v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al

Filing 31

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 30 SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS Stipulation, filed by Uelian De Abadia-Peixoto, Esmar Cifuentes, Mi Lian Wei, Pedro Nolasco Jose Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/27/11. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/27/2011)

Download PDF
*E-Filed 9/27/11* 1 2 3 4 5 6 DAVID J. BERGER, State Bar No. 147645 THOMAS J. MARTIN, State Bar No. 150039 CATHERINE E. MORENO, State Bar No. 264517 ANALISA M. PRATT, State Bar No. 262951 SAVITH S. IYENGAR, State Bar No. 268342 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation 650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 Telephone: (650) 493-9300 Facsimile: (650) 565-5100 Email: tmartin@wsgr.com 7 8 9 10 11 PHILIP HWANG, State Bar No. 185070 PAUL CHAVEZ, State Bar No. 241576 AUDREY DANIEL, State Bar No. 266117 LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS 131 Steuart Street, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 543-9444 Facsimile: (415) 543-0296 Email: pchavez@lccr.com 12 13 14 15 16 JULIA HARUMI MASS, State Bar No. 189649 ALAN L. SCHLOSSER, State Bar No. 49957 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 621-2493 Facsimile: (415) 255-8437 Email: jmass@aclunc.org 17 18 Attorneys for Plaintiffs UELIAN DE ABADIA-PEIXOTO, ESMAR CIFUENTES, PEDRO NOLASCO JOSE, and MI LIAN WEI 19 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 21 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 22 23 UELIAN DE ABADIA-PEIXOTO, et al., 24 25 26 Plaintiffs, vs. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., 27 Defendants. 28 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. CV 11-04001 RS CLASS ACTION JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS 4534816_3.docx STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE CASE NO. CV 11-04001 RS 1 WHEREAS, on August 15, 2011, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint against Defendants; 2 WHEREAS, on August 17, 2011, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class Certification and 3 4 noticed it for hearing on October 27, 2011; WHEREAS, on September 8, 2011, Defendants filed their Motion Seeking Enlargement 5 of Time to File Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification, and stated that 6 Defendants intended to file a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint; 7 WHEREAS, on September 12, 2011, Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to Defendants’ 8 Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification; 9 WHEREAS, pursuant to an Order by the Court on September 12, 2011, the parties 10 engaged in further meet and confer negotiations to attempt to agree on a briefing schedule for 11 both the motion for class certification and for any motion to dismiss, with a joint hearing to be 12 held no later than November 17, 2011; 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the undersigned, subject to the approval of the Court, as follows: 1. Defendants shall file and serve their Motion to Dismiss the Complaint on or before October 11, 2011; 2. Defendants shall file and serve their Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification on or before October 14, 2011; 3. Plaintiffs shall file and serve their Reply in Support of their Motion for Class Certification on or before October 24, 2011; 4. Plaintiffs shall file and serve their Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint on or before November 1, 2011; 5. Defendants shall file and serve their Reply in Support of their Motion to Dismiss the Complaint on or before November 10, 2011; 6. A joint hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint will be held on November 17, 2011. 27 28 -1STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE CASE NO. CV 11-04001 RS 4534816_3.docx 1 2 Dated: September 27, 2011 3 4 5 6 8 9 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA Julia Harumi Mass Alan L. Schlosser 10 11 12 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 /s/ David J. Berger David J. Berger WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation Thomas J. Martin Catherine E. Moreno Analisa M. Pratt Savith S. Iyengar LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS Philip Hwang Paul Chavez Audrey Daniel 7 14 By: Dated: September 27, 2011 By: /s/ Jeffrey M. Bauer JEFFREY M. BAUER Trial Attorney District Court Section Office of Immigration Litigation Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 868, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Telephone: (202) 532-4786 Facsimile (202) 616-8962 Email: jeffrey.bauer@usdoj.gov TONY WEST Assistant Attorney General Civil Division DAVID J. KLINE Director Office of Immigration Litigation District Court Section 26 VICTOR M. LAWRENCE Principal Assistant Director Office of Immigration Litigation 27 Attorneys for Defendants 28 -2STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE CASE NO. CV 11-04001 RS 4534816_3.docx 1 SIGNATURE ATTESTATION 2 I, David J. Berger, attest that I obtained the concurrence of Jeffrey M. Bauer in filing this 3 document. I declare under penalty of the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and 4 correct. 5 Executed this 27th day of September, 2011 in Palo Alto, California. 6 /s/ David J. Berger David J. Berger 7 8 9 10 [PROPOSED] ORDER 11 PURSUANT TO THE JOINT STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. The briefing 12 schedule set forth above is hereby approved by the Court. 13 14 15 16 9/27/11 Dated: ______________________ _______________________________________ Honorable Richard Seeborg United States District Judge Northern District of California 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE CASE NO. CV 11-04001 RS 4534816_3.docx

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?