Clay v. City of Oakland et al

Filing 42

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND RELATED DEADLINES AS MODIFIED 41 . Completion of settlement with Judge Beeler: 12/5/2014. Case Management Statement due 1/7/2015. Case Management Conference and Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings 28 36 set for 1/7/2014 01:00 PM in Courtroom A, 15th Floor, San Francisco. Oppositions due by 12/17/2014. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 10/21/2014. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/21/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

YOLANDA HUANG, CA State Bar # 104543
PO Box 5475
Berkeley, CA 94705
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
RICKEY CLAY aka
BAKARI OLATUNJI

8
9
10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

RICKEY CLAY also known as
BAKARI OLATUNJI
vs.

CITY OF OAKLAND, DEANNA
SANTANA, BLAIR ALEXANDER, R.
VAN SLOTEN, MARCOS CAMPOS,
DOES 1-250.

23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND
ALL RELATED DATES AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER AS MODIFIED
Complaint Filed: October 7, 2013

Defendants.

21
22

Plaintiff,

Case No. C13-4633 NC

The parties herein hereby stipulate and jointly apply to the Court for relief from
existing deadlines in the above-referenced matter as follows:

The parties had agreed to a voluntary settlement conference with Magistrate Judge
Laurel Beeler. The initial settlement conference was originally held on August 5, 2014. A
second settlement conference was held on September 24, 2014. The parties and Magistrate
Judge Beeler have agreed that further settlement discussions would be productive. It would

Page 1 of 1
Clay v. City of Oakland, et al.

1

promote the possibility of settlement and be in the interest of justice if the case management

2

conference, currently set for November 12, 2014, and certain other deadlines, including those

3

relating to defendants’ 12(c) motions, were continued until after the parties have had an

4

opportunity to for further settlement discussions.

5

As a consequence, the parties jointly request that the Court continue the present

6

deadlines for filing of the joint case management conference statement, the date of the case

7

management conference, defendants’ noticed 12c motions, and discovery as follows:

8

Completion of settlement conference with Judge Laurel Beeler by December 5, 2014;

9

Plaintiff’s Opposition to the 12 (c) motions due: December 17, 2014;

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Deposition of defendant Santana completed by December 30, 2014;
Filing of joint case management conference statement: January 7, 2015;
Case management conference: January 14, 2015 at 10:00 am (or at the same time as
the 12(c) hearing;
Defendants’ 12(c) motions: January 14, 2015 at 1 pm (or at the same time as the
CMC).

DATED: October 17, 2014

YOLANDA HUANG, ESQ.

19
20

By: /s/

21

YOLANDA HUANG, ESQ.
Attorney for Plaintiff

22
23

Yolanda Huang

DATED: August 8, 2014

OAKLAND CITY ATTORNEY

24
25

By: /s/ Wendy Garbers
WENDY GARBERS, ESQ.
Attorneys for Defendants
CITY OF OAKLAND, et al

26
27
28

Page 2 of 2
Clay v. City of Oakland, et al.

1

ORDER

2
3

GOOD CAUSE appearing therefor, and the parties having so stipulated, the Court

4

hereby GRANTS the parties’ joint application for continuance of all existing deadlines and

5

hearing and filing dates as follows:

6

Completion of settlement conference with Judge Laurel Beeler by December 5, 2014;

7

Plaintiff’s Oppositions to the 12(c) motions due: December 17, 2014;

8

Filing of joint case management conference statement: January 7, 2015;

9

Case management conference: January 14, 2015 at ________; Courtroom A, San Francisco
1:00 p.m.

10

5

7

7

Defendants’ 12(c) motions: January 14, 2015 at ___________.
1:00 p.m., Courtroom A, San Francisco.

11
12
13
14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED

S

NATHANAEL M. COUSINS
. Cousins
Unitedge Nathanael M
States Magistrate Judge
Jud

RT

23

ER

H

24
25

R NIA

NO

22

FO

21

DERED
SO OR
IT IS
IFIED
S MOD
A

LI

20

Dated: October 21, 2014

UNIT
ED

19

RT
U
O

18

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

A

17

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

26
27
28
Page 3 of 3
Clay v. City of Oakland, et al.