Melvin Wishum et al v. State of California et al

Filing 17

ORDER VACATING MOTION HEARING re 13 MOTION to Dismiss DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT filed by State of California, California Correctional Health Care Services, Corrections and Rehabilitation CDCR, James D. Hartley, Edmund G. Brown, Jr., P D Brazelton. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 30, 2014. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/30/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MELVIN WISHUM, et al., Case No. 14-cv-01491-JST Plaintiffs, 8 v. 9 10 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. ORDER VACATING MOTION HEARING Re: ECF No. 13 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 Before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss. ECF No. 13. Pursuant to Federal Rule 13 of Civil Procedure 78(b) and Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds that the parties’ briefs have 14 thoroughly addressed the issues, rendering the matter suitable for disposition without oral 15 argument. The hearing on this matter, currently scheduled for June 5, 2014, is hereby 16 VACATED. 17 However, if any party advises the Court in writing by no later than two days from the date 18 of this Order that most or all of the argument for its side will be conducted by a lawyer who has 19 been licensed to practice law for four or fewer years, and who has not previously presented 20 argument before this Court, then the Court will reschedule the hearing at a time that is convenient 21 to all parties in order to provide that opportunity. Counsel shall confer with each other, and the 22 party requesting the rescheduling of the hearing shall identify the upcoming available dates on the 23 Court’s calendar at which all counsel are available for the hearing. 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 30, 2014 ______________________________________ JON S. TIGAR United States District Judge

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?