Sessoms v. Thornton et al
Filing
100
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND SUMMARYJUDGMENT AND CASEMANAGEMENT DEADLINES 99 .(whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/15/2015)
1
6
IVOR SAMSON (State Bar No. 52767)
ivor.samson@dentons.com
BONNIE LAU (State Bar No. 246188)
bonnie.lau@dentons.com
JESSICA L. DUGGAN (State Bar No. 271703)
jessica.duggan@dentons.com
DENTONS US LLP
525 Market Street, 26th Floor
San Francisco, California 94105-2708
Telephone:
(415) 882-5000
Facsimile:
(415) 882-0300
7
Attorneys for Plaintiff TIO DINERO SESSOMS
8
13
KAMALA D. HARRIS
Attorney General of California
JOHN P. DEVINE
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
SUSAN J. KAWALA (State Bar No. 178612)
Susan.Kawala@doj.ca.gov
Deputy Attorney General
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004
Telephone:
(415) 703-5708
Facsimile:
(415) 703-5480
14
Attorneys for Defendant DARRIN BRIGHT
2
3
4
5
9
10
11
12
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
18
TIO DINERO SESSOMS,
Plaintiff,
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case No. CV 13-0714 WHA (PR)
v.
R.N. HELEN THORNTON; R.N. FRANCES
SSEMPEBWA; DR. EDWARD BIRDSONG;
DR. KUMAR; DR. POMPAN; DR. JOHN
DOWBAK; DR. ELIZABETH B.
SCHNEIDER; DR. T.W. WY; DR. BRIGHT;
DR. A. ADAMS; G. ELLIS; RANDY
GROUNDS,
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER TO EXTEND SUMMARY
JUDGMENT AND CASE
MANAGEMENT DEADLINES
Defendants.
26
27
28
CASE NO. CV13-00714 WHA (PR)
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
TO EXTEND SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND
CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES
1
STIPULATION
2
Plaintiff Tio Dinero Sessoms and Defendant Darren Bright, by and through their
3
undersigned counsel, respectfully request that the Court enter the following stipulation pursuant
4
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) and Civil Local Rule 6-2 for a brief extension of (1) the
5
opposition and reply brief deadlines and hearing date for Defendant’s motion for summary
6
judgment; and (2) the case management statement deadline and case management conference.
7
In support of this stipulation, the undersigned parties provide the following facts:
8
1.
9
On May 5, 2015, this Court issued an order setting Defendants’ deadline to file a
motion for summary judgment on June 4, 2015. Due to the withdrawal of Plaintiff’s former
10
pro bono counsel, the Court referred the case to the Federal Pro Bono Project and granted
11
Plaintiff a four-week extension of the deadline to respond. The order also stated that the Court
12
“would also consider a reasonable motion to extend or to continue deadlines (where good cause is
13
shown) brought by new appointed pro bono counsel.” (Dkt. 91.)
14
2.
On June 1, 2015, the Court appointed Ivor Samson, Bonnie Lau and Jessica
15
Duggan, all of Dentons US LLP, as pro bono counsel for Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
16
1915(e)(1) and the Court’s Federal Pro Bono Project guidelines. The Court set the briefing
17
schedule on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment as follows: Defendants’ motion for
18
summary judgment due on June 4, 2015; Plaintiff’s opposition brief due on July 16, 2015; and
19
Defendants’ reply brief due on July 23, 2015. The Court scheduled the hearing on the motion for
20
summary judgment on August 13, 2015 at 8:00 a.m. (Dkt. 96.)
21
3.
The Court also ordered the parties to file a joint case management statement
22
pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16-9 no later than August 6, 2015, and scheduled a case
23
management conference on August 13, 2015 at 8:00 a.m. (Dkt. 96).
24
25
4.
Defendant Bright filed a “Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment” on
June 4, 2015. (Dkt. 98.)
26
27
28
CASE NO. CV13-00714 WHA (PR)
-1-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
TO EXTEND SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND
CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES
1
5.
Good cause exists to extend the opposition and reply deadlines and hearing date
2
for Defendant Bright’s Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment, as well as the case
3
management statement deadline and case management conference. Ms. Lau has a Federal Circuit
4
appeal brief due on July 6 and a summary judgment motion due on July 8. Ms. Lau also has a
5
previously-scheduled work trip to Japan from July 13-24 for an investigation in another matter.
6
Ms. Duggan has a post-trial brief due on June 8 and closing arguments in that same trial on June
7
22. In addition, Ms. Duggan has previously-scheduled out-of-state family commitments from
8
July 2-9 and July 30-August 3. Counsel for Defendant Bright, Susan Kawala, has a prepaid
9
vacation from August 9-16, which conflicts with the current hearing date.
10
In light of the above facts, the parties jointly request that the Court briefly extend the
11
summary judgment and case management deadlines, and enter the following stipulation as an
12
Order of the Court:
13
A.
Plaintiff shall file his opposition brief by August 17, 2015.
14
B.
Defendant shall file his reply brief by August 24, 2015.
15
C.
The hearing on Defendant Bright’s Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment
16
shall be on September 10, 2015 at 8:00 a.m.
17
D.
The case management conference shall be on September 10, 2015 at 8:00 a.m.
18
E.
The parties shall file a joint case management statement no later than September 3,
19
2015.
20
Dated: June 10, 2015
21
Respectfully submitted,
DENTONS US LLP
22
23
BY:
24
/s/ Bonnie Lau
Bonnie Lau
Attorneys for Plaintiff
TIO DINERO SESSOMS
25
26
27
28
CASE NO. CV13-00714 WHA (PR)
-2-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
TO EXTEND SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND
CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES
1
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
2
3
BY:
4
/s/ Susan J. Kawala
Susan J. Kawala
Attorneys for Defendant
DARREN BRIGHT
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CASE NO. CV13-00714 WHA (PR)
-3-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
TO EXTEND SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND
CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES
1
PROPOSED ORDER
2
Pursuant to Stipulation and for good cause shown,
3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
4
5
Dated: June 15, 2015.
6
BY:
Hon. William Alsup
United States District Judge
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CASE NO. CV13-00714 WHA (PR)
-4-
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
TO EXTEND SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND
CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES
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?