Zamora et al v. City of Oakland et al

Filing 38

ORDER TO DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS' SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION IN OPPOSIITON TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Nathanael M. Cousins on 8/2/2013. (nclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/2/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

10
11 OLGA ZAMORA, Guardian ad litem for
12
13

Maria Zamora, and JOSE ZAMORA,
Guardian ad litem for Omar Zamora and
Edgar Zamora,
Plaintiffs,

14
15
16
17
18

Case No. 12-cv-02734 NC
ORDER TO DEFENDANTS TO
RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION
IN OPPOSIITON TO MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

v.
Re: Dkt. No. 37
CITY OF OAKLAND, ANTHONY BATTS,
CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO and GEORGE
GASCON,
Defendants.

19
20

On July 23, 2013, the Court issued an order permitting plaintiffs to file supplemental

21 materials in support of their request to deny defendants’ motion for summary judgment or
22 allow additional time to take discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). Dkt.
23 No. 36. On July 30, 2013, plaintiffs filed a supplemental declaration of James Martinez in
24 opposition to defendants’ motion for summary judgment, asserting that defendants failed to
25 produce essential discovery that was requested by plaintiffs. Dkt. No. 37. By August 6,
26 2013 at 5:00 p.m., defendants must file a response to plaintiffs’ supplemental declaration,
27 which may be accompanied by attachments, addressing (1) whether defendants have failed
28 to produce discovery (including photographs and videotapes of the incident) which is in
Case No. 12-cv-02734 NC
ORDER TO RESPOND TO
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION

ssession, cu
ustody, or control and is essential to oppose t pending summary
i
the
g
1 their pos
nt
a
s
heir
tion
pporting declarations; (2)
2 judgmen motion, as plaintiffs assert in th opposit and sup
r
ested that discovery, an were dil
d
and
ligent in pu
ursuing it; (3 and
3)
3 whether plaintiffs timely reque
r
s
w
s
ke
y.
4 whether the Court should allow plaintiffs additional time to tak discovery

5

IT IS SO OR
T
RDERED.

6

Date: August 2, 2013
t

____
__________
__________
_____
Nath
hanael M. C
Cousins
Unit States M
ted
Magistrate J
Judge

7
8
9
10
0
11
1
12
2
13
3
14
4
15
5
16
6
17
7
18
8
19
9
20
0
21
1
22
2
23
3
24
4
25
5
26
6
27
7
28
8
Case No. 12-cv-0273 NC
34
ORDER TO RESPO
R
OND TO
SUPPLE
EMENTAL DECLARAT
D
TION

2