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)

Download PDF
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?