Norsworthy v. Beard et al

Filing 48

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 47 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Revising Schedule for Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Michelle-Lael B. Norsworthy. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on January 2, 2015. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/2/2015)

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7

JEFFREY B. NORSWORTHY (a/k/a
MICHELLE-LAEL B. NORSWORTHY),

8

Plaintiff,

9
10
11
12

vs.

Case No. 3:14-cv-00695-JST
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER REVISING SCHEDULE FOR
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

JEFFREY BEARD; A. NEWTON; A.
ADAMS; LORI ZAMORA; RAYMOND
J. COFFIN; MARION SPEARMAN;
DAVID VAN LEER; JARED LOZANO;
and DOES 1-30,

13

Defendants.

14
15
16
17
18

Plaintiff and Defendants (collectively, “Parties”) in the above-captioned case hereby
stipulate as follows:
WHEREAS, at the Initial Case Management Conference on October 15, 2014, the Court

19

requested that the Parties submit a proposed schedule for Plaintiff’s forthcoming Motion for

20

Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. No. 28);

21

WHEREAS, on November 6, 2014, the Court entered the stipulated Scheduling Order

22

Regarding Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which, inter alia, set January 5, 2015 as

23

the close of fact discovery and set March 4, 2015 as the date for the hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion

24

for Preliminary Injunction;

25

WHEREAS, in the interim, Parties have diligently and in good faith engaged in discovery

26

in preparation for briefing on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, including the production of

27

thousands of documents and the taking of seven depositions;

28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] REVISED
SCHEDULING ORDER
DB2/ 25543461.1

1

WHEREAS, Defendants have informed Plaintiff that they will not be able to complete the

2

production of documents responsive to the outstanding requests for production until the end of

3

January at the earliest;

4

WHEREAS, Plaintiff diligently is seeking to schedule the deposition of Plaintiff’s treating

5

psychologist during part of the relevant period, Dr. Reese, who has retired from CDCR and is

6

represented by separate counsel, but will not be able to complete that deposition by the current

7

deadline for fact discovery related to the motion for preliminary injunction;

8
9
10

WHEREAS, in light of these circumstances, Parties would benefit from a brief extension
of the current schedule to allow Parties to complete discovery prior to briefing the Motion for
Preliminary Injunction;

11

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the Parties, and subject to

12

the concurrence of the Court, that the schedule for Plaintiff’s forthcoming Motion for Preliminary

13

Injunction will be revised as follows:

14
15
Event

16

Originally Set

Revised Date

Date

17
18

Close of Fact Discovery as It Relates

19

to Preliminary Injunction Motion

20

Disclosure of Plaintiff’s Expert

21

Report(s)

22

January 5, 2015

February 2, 2015

January 5, 2015

February 2, 2015

January 21, 2015

February 18, 2015

Disclosure of Plaintiff’s Reply Expert January 29, 2015

February 26, 2015

Disclosure of Defendants’ Rebuttal

23

Expert Report(s)

24
25

Report(s)

26
27

Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary

28

Injunction

DB2/ 25543461.1

2

January 29, 2015

February 26, 2015

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] REVISED
SCHEDULING ORDER

1
Event

2

Originally Set

Revised Date

Date

3

Defendants’ Opposition to Motion for February 12, 2015

4
5

Preliminary Injunction

6

Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of

7

March 12, 2015

Motion for Preliminary Injunction

February 19, 2015

March 19, 2015

March 4, 2015 at

April 1, 2015 or such

2:00 pm in

other date set by the

Courtroom 91

Court.

8
Hearing on Motion for Preliminary
9
Injunction
10
11
12
IT IS SO STIPULATED.

13
14
15
16

Dated: December 31, 2014

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

17
By

21

/s/ - Herman J. Hoying
HERMAN J. HOYING
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
One Market, Spear Street Tower
San Francisco, California 94105-1126
Telephone:
415.442.1000
Facsimile:
415.442.1001
[e-mail]

22

Attorneys for Plaintiff

18
19
20

23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The parties shall meet and confer regarding the need for an evidentiary hearing and shall inform
the Court should they believe that an evidentiary hearing will be beneficial in deciding
Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction.

DB2/ 25543461.1

2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] REVISED
SCHEDULING ORDER

1

Dated: December 31, 2014

KAMALA D. HARRIS
Attorney General of California
WILLIAM C. KWONG
Supervising Deputy Attorney General

2
3
4

By
5
6
7
8
9

/s/ Edward R. Fluet
EDWARD R. FLUET (State Bar No. 247203)
Deputy Attorney General
455 Golden Gate Ave., Suite 11000
San Francisco, California 94102-7004
Telephone:
415.703.5836
Facsimile:
415.703.5843
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants M. Spearman,
R. Coffin, J. Lozano, A. Adams, and L.
Zamora

10
11
12
13
IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
Dated: January 2, 2015

I

The Honorable Jon S. Tigar

RT

20

n S.
J u d ge J o

H

ER

Ti ga r

21
22

FO

NO

19

LI

18

ERED

ORD
T IS SO

R NIA

S

UNIT
ED

16

RT
U
O

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

15

A

14

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C

23
24
25
26
27
28

DB2/ 25543461.1

2

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] REVISED
SCHEDULING ORDER