Stein et al v. Harris et al

Filing 11

ORDER granting 10 Stipulation to Change Time for Plaintiffs to File Response to Motion to Dismiss filed by Mitchell J. Stein, Mitchell J. Stein & Associates LLP. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 4/23/2012. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/23/2012)

James R. Leickly, Esq. (Ohio Bar No. 0038309)
MITCHELL J. STEIN & ASSOCIATES LLP
60 West Columbus Street
Pickerington, Ohio, 43147
Phone [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for all Plaintiffs
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No. 3:12-cv-00985-JSC

MITCHELL J. STEIN, an individual;
MITCHELL J. STEIN & ASSOCIATES
LLP, a California Limited Liability
Partnership Approved May 2, 2011 by the
California State Bar, Certificate Number
54393,

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER,
PURSUANT TO CIVIL L.R. 6-2(a), TO
CHANGE TIME FOR PLAINTIFFS TO
FILE RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO DISMISS FILED 4/10/12

Plaintiffs,
vs.

[Civil L.R. 6-2(a)]

KAMALA D. HARRIS, an individual;
BENJAMIN DIEHL, an individual; JAMES
M. TOMA, an individual; and DOES 1-10,
inclusive,

Judge: Hon. Mag. Jacqueline Scott
Corley

Defendants.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY THE PARTIES, pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2(a)
that Plaintiffs be granted an addition 21 days from their current April 24, 2012 deadline
to file their memorandum and brief in opposition to the “Motion to Dismiss Complaint
Without Leave to Amend; Alternatively, to Change Venue” (hereinafter the “Motion to
Dismiss”). The new, requested date would be May 15, 2012.
Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2(a), the reason for this stipulation and request to this
Court is that the Motion to Dismiss raises complex issues and that Plaintiffs are engaging
new legal counsel to work on this case and address such issues.

1

Also, as required by Civil L.R. 6-2(a), the parties inform the Court that there have
been no previous extensions or enlargements of time in this case in general or as related
to the Motion to Dismiss in particular.
Finally, as also required by Civil L.R. 6-2(a), the parties inform this Court that the
only effect on the current court schedule would be to postpone the current 9 a.m. May 31,
2012 hearing date on the Motion to Dismiss. The parties after consultation have agreed
to request from this Court a new hearing date that would be set for no earlier than the
week of Monday, July 9, 2012. All other Court deadlines shall remain extant.

/s/ James R. Leickly
James R. Leickly, Esq. (Ohio Bar No. 0038309)
MITCHELL J. STEIN & ASSOCIATES LLP
60 West Columbus Street
Pickerington, Ohio, 43147
Phone [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for all Plaintiffs
/s/ Molly S. Murphy,
Molly S. Murphy, Esq. (State Bar No. 149907)
Deputy Attorney General of California
300 South Spring Street, Suite 1702
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorney for Defendants

S

UNIT
ED

A
N

R NIA

LI
C

FO

F
D IS T IC T O
R

LI

N

FO

Scott Corley

A

R NIA

GRANTED

Judge Jacqueline

ER

H

UNIT
ED

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT

ER

H

2

rley

NO

Jud

cott Co

RT
U
O

eline S
ge Jacqu

RT

TED
GRAN

RT
U
O

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

NO

Dated: April 23, 2012

S

Pursuant to the stipulation, the briefing schedule is modified as follows:
Plaintiff's oppositions due on 5/15/2012
Defendant's rely due on 5/29/2012
Hearing is reset to July 12, 2012 at 9:00 a.m.

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C