Barrilleaux v. Mendicino County et al
Filing
113
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 110 : Replies due by 8/5/2016. Responses due by 7/22/2016. Motion Hearing re 99 Motion for Preliminary Injunction is reset for 8/22/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Thelton E. Henderson. Opposition due 7/22/2016; Reply due 8/5/2016. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 7/12/2016. (afmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/13/2016)
1 SEDGWICK LLP
JAMES S. BROWN, State Bar No. 135810
2 james.brown@sedgwicklaw.com
MARC A. KOONIN, State Bar No. 166210
3 marc.koonin@sedgwicklaw.com
333 Bush Street, 30th Floor
4 San Francisco, CA 94104-2834
Telephone: 415.781.7900
5 Facsimile: 415.781.2635
6 Attorneys for Defendants SUPERIOR
COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
7 MENDOCINO and JUDICIAL COUNCIL
OF CALIFORNIA, ADMINISTRATIVE
8 OFFICE OF THE COURTS
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
13
14 JESSICA BARRILLEAUX,
15
PLAINTIFF,
16 v.
17 MENDOCINO COUNTY; SUPERIOR
COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
18 MENDOCINO; JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF
CALIFORNIA, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
19 OF THE COURTS,
20
DEFENDANTS.
21
22
Case No. 3:14-cv-01373 TEH
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER
CHANGING HEARING DATE AND
BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION;
[PROPOSED ORDER]
Judge:
Date:
Time:
Place:
The Hon. Thelton E. Henderson
August 8, 2016
10:00 a.m.
Courtroom 2
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1, 6-2 and 7-12, and
23 supported by the declarations contained herein, the parties through undersigned counsel hereby
24 stipulate and respectfully request that the Court continue the hearing date on Plaintiff Jessica
25 Barrileaux's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Docket No. 99) from August 8, 2016 to August
26 22, 2016. The Parties also stipulate and respectfully request that the Court order the briefing
27 schedule to track the new hearing date, with Defendants' Opposition date continued to July 22,
28 2016, and Plaintiff's Reply date continued to August 5, 2016.
Case No. 3:14-cv-01373 TEH
-1STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
83532012v1
1
The acceptance of this stipulated request will obviate the need for the court to address
2 Judicial Defendants' Motion to Extend Time to File Opposition To Plaintiff's Motion for
3 Preliminary Injunction (Docket No. 107).
4
The parties declare in support of this request:
5
WHEREAS Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction was filed on July 1, 2016,
6 immediately before the Independence Day weekend;
7
WHEREAS due to the holidays and resulting shortened work-week, Judicial Defendants
8 met and conferred with Plaintiff, seeking additional time to review and respond to Plaintiff's
9 Motion;
10
WHEREAS Plaintiff agrees to the additional time request, and Defendant County of
11 Mendocino joins in the request;
12
WHEREAS there are no prior time modifications in this matter, whether by stipulation or
13 court order; and
14
WHEREAS the requested time modification would not result in any substantive delay in
15 the schedule of this case;
16
THEREFORE, pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, the parties through their respective attorneys
17 stipulate as follows:
18
1.
All Defendants shall file their Opposition to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction
19 no later than July 22, 2016;
20
2.
Plaintiff shall file her Reply no later than August 5, 2016; and
21
3.
The parties respectfully request that the Court hear the Motion for Preliminary
22 Injunction at a time convenient for the Court on August 22, 2016, or as soon thereafter as possible.
23
IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED.
24 DATED: July 12, 2016
25
26
By:/s/ Paul L. Rein
Paul L. Rein
Attorneys for Plaintiff
JESSICA BARRILEAUX
27
28
LAW OFFICES OF PAUL L. REIN
LAW OFFICES OF JIM W. YU
Case No. 3:14-cv-01373 TEH
-2STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
83532012v1
1
2 DATED: July 12, 2016
3
By:/s/ James S. Brown
James S. Brown
Marc A. Koonin
Attorneys for Defendants
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
MENDOCINO and JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF
CALIFORNIA, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE
COURTS
4
5
6
7
8
SEDGWICK LLP
DATED: July 12, 2016
9
KECK LAW OFFICES
By:/s/ Anne L. Keck
Anne L. Keck
Attorneys for Defendant
COUNTY OF MENDOCINO
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
[PROPOSED] ORDER
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all Defendants shall
file their Opposition to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction no later than July 22, 2016; Plaintiff
shall file her Reply no later than August 5, 2016; and that the hearing on the Motion for
Preliminary Injunction will be heard on August 22, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2 of the
above-entitled Court.
SO ORDERED
20
21
Dated: ________________
7/12/2016
22
__________________________________________
The Hon. Thelton E. Henderson
United States District Judge
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 3:14-cv-01373 TEH
-3STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
83532012v1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
ATTESTATION
I, James S. Brown, am the ECF User whose identification and password are being used to
file the STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING hearing date and briefing schedule
on PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; [PROPOSED ORDER]. In
compliance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this
document has been obtained from each of its signatories.
DATED: July 12, 2016
Sedgwick LLP
By:/s/ James S. Brown
James S. Brown
Marc A. Koonin
Attorneys for Defendants
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
MENDOCINO and JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF
CALIFORNIA, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE
COURTS
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 3:14-cv-01373 TEH
-4STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGING HEARING DATE AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
83532012v1
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?