Henderson v. Hernandez et al

Filing 138

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 136 STIPULATION WITH [PROPOSED] ORDER to Continue the Case Schedule filed by W. L. Muniz, Jared D. Lozano, Carolyn Hernandez, M. Hodges. Fact-Discovery Cut Off 6/7/2019. Expert Disclosures & Expert Reports Due 6/28 /2019. Expert-Discovery Cut Off 7/26/2019. Rebuttal Expert Disclosures & Rebuttal Reports Due 8/30/2019. Summary-Judgment Deadline 10/25/2019. Pretrial Conference StatementDue 1/24/2020. Pretrial Conference set for 1/31/2020 at 2:00 PM in Oaklan d, Courtroom 2, 4th Floor before Judge Jon S. Tigar. Jury Trial set for 2/24/2020 at 8:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 9, 19th Floor before Judge Jon S. Tigar. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on February 13, 2019. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/13/2019)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
WILLIAM C. KWONG
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
JEFFREY THOMAS FISHER, State Bar No. 303712
IAN MICHAEL ELLIS, State Bar No. 280254
Deputy Attorneys General
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000
San Francisco, CA 94102-7004
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants C. Hernandez, M. Hodges,
J.D. Lozano, and W. L. Muniz

8
9
10
11
12

MICHAEL MELENDEZ, State Bar No. 125895
TERI MAE RUTLEDGE, State Bar No. 261229
Cozen O’Conner
101 Montgomery Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff Johndell Henderson

13
14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17
18
JOHNDELL HENDERSON,

Case No. 14-1857 JST (PR)

19
Plaintiff, STIPULATED MOTION TO CONTINUE
THE CASE SCHEDULE; AND

20
v.
21
22
23

[PROPOSED] ORDER ADOPTING NEW
CASE SCHEDULE
C. HERNANDEZ, et al.,
Judge:
The Honorable Jon S. Tigar
Defendants. Trial Date:
August 26, 2019
Action Filed: April 23, 2014

24
25
26

Defendants Hernandez, Hodges, Lozano, and Muniz, joined by Plaintiff Henderson, by and

27

through their attorneys, file this Stipulated Motion to Continue the Case Schedule under Federal

28

Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and Civil Local Rules 7-12, 7-13, and 16-2(d).
1
Jnt. Stip. & Mot. Continue Case Schedule; [Proposed] Order (C 14-1857 JST (PR))

1
2

RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action concerns alleged violations of Plaintiff’s rights under the First

3

Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Religious Land Use and Incarcerated

4

Persons Act (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1. (ECF No. 15.) The Court partially granted and

5

partially denied Defendants’ motions for summary judgment (ECF No. 70; ECF No. 105) before

6

appointing pro-bono counsel for Plaintiff. (ECF No. 117.)

7

In May 2018, the parties filed a stipulated case-management statement and a proposed case

8

schedule (ECF No. 121), which the Court adopted in a May 30, 2018 Scheduling Order (ECF No.

9

124). That schedule set, among other dates, the fact discovery cutoff for December 28, 2018.

10

On June 22, 2019, Plaintiff moved for leave to modify or rescind the Court prior summary

11

judgment rulings in this matter and for leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 126.)

12

Defendants opposed the motion. (ECF No. 127.)

13

On December 3, 2018, the parties filed a stipulated motion to extend the case schedule.

14

(ECF No. 130.) That motion sought to extend the fact-discovery cutoff to March 1, 2019, but to

15

leave the scheduled trial date undisturbed. (Id. at 2.) The Court signed and granted the parties’

16

stipulation that same day. (ECF No. 131 at 3.) And, two days later, on December 5, the Court

17

granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff’s June 22 motion for leave. (ECF No. 132.)

18

Plaintiff’s counsel sent Defendants a draft of their proposed Second Amended Complaint

19

(SAC) on January 16. The parties conferred by email regarding the SAC’s contents for roughly

20

one week in an effort to minimize the need for subsequent motion practice. On January 30,

21

Plaintiff filed the SAC, which added two new Defendants to this action. (ECF No. 133.) The

22

fact-discovery cutoff is currently March 1, 2019.

23
24

GOOD-FAITH REQUEST FOR CASE-SCHEDULE MODIFICATION
The parties aver that, until the Court’s December 5, 2018 order, there remained a pending

25

motion that could re-define the scope of discovery in this action. The parties further aver that,

26

until Plaintiff could craft a Second Amended Complaint based on the Court’s guidance in that

27

December 5, 2018 order (ECF No. 132), the scope of discovery remained uncertain. The parties

28

further agree that the uncertainty about the scope of this case prevented them from formulating
2
Jnt. Stip. & Mot. Continue Case Schedule; [Proposed] Order (C 14-1857 JST (PR))

1

and executing targeted discovery in this matter. Consequently, both parties propounded their

2

most relevant discovery requests in January 2019, and bureaucratic and institutional restrictions

3

will make fully responding to that discovery within the current discovery timeframe infeasible.

4

The parties believe that the events described above, particularly the Court’s ruling on

5

Plaintiff’s motion for leave, Plaintiff’s subsequent filing of the SAC, and the recent discovery

6

exchanged by the parties, constitute good cause for continuing the schedule in this case. The

7

parties propose to continue the schedule as outlined below in order to permit necessary discovery.

8

PROPOSED CASE-SCHEDULE MODIFICATION

9
10

The Parties stipulate to, and respectfully request of the Court, the following modification of
the Case Management deadlines:

11
12
Event

Currently Scheduled Date

Proposed Modification

Fact-Discovery Cut Off

March 1, 2019

June 7, 2019

Expert Disclosures &
Expert Reports Due

March 15, 2019

June 28, 2019

16

Rebuttal Expert Disclosures &
Rebuttal Reports Due

March 29, 2019

August 30, 2019

17

Expert-Discovery Cut Off

April 12, 2019

August 23, 2019 July 26, 2019

18

Summary-Judgment Deadline

May 3, 2019

October 25, 2019

19

Pretrial Conference Statement
Due

July 26, 2019

January 24, 2020

Pretrial Conference

August 2, 2019 at 2:00 p.m.

January 31, 2020 at 2:00 p.m.

Trial 1

August 26, 2019 at 8:30 a.m. February 24, 2020 at 8:00 a.m.

13
14
15

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The parties have proposed a new trial date in February 2020 in part to accommodate
defense counsel Jeffrey Fisher, who presently has another trial scheduled before your Honor in
December 2019 in the matter of Hunter v. Sokoloff, Case No. C 14-05031-JST (PR).
3
Jnt. Stip. & Mot. Continue Case Schedule; [Proposed] Order (C 14-1857 JST (PR))

1

Dated: February 11, 2019

Respectfully submitted,

2

XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
WILLIAM C. KWONG
Supervising Deputy Attorney General

3
4
5

/s/ __Jeffrey T. Fisher__________
JEFFREY T. FISHER
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendants C. Hernandez,
M. Hodges, J.D. Lozano, and W. L. Muniz

6
7
8
9

/s/ __Teri May Rutledge_________
Teri Mae Rutledge
Cozen O’Conner, LLP
Attorney for Plaintiff Johndell Henderson

Dated: February 11, 2019
10
11
12

ATTESTATION OF CONCURRENCE IN FILING
13
14
15
16

In accordance with Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), I attest that concurrence in the filing of the
document has been obtained from each of the signatories hereto.
Dated: February 11, 2019

By:

17

/s/ Jeffrey Fisher
Jeffrey T. Fisher
Attorney for Defendants

18
19
[PROPOSED] ORDER

20
21

The Court finds that the parties’ motion to continue the case schedule is supported by

22

GOOD CAUSE and, on that basis, the Court GRANTS that parties’ motion. Further, the Court

23

has reviewed the parties’ proposed changes to case schedule and APPROVES them. as modified.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26

February 13, 2019
Date: __________________

________________________________________
The Hon. Jon S. Tigar, District Judge

27
28
4
Jnt. Stip. & Mot. Continue Case Schedule; [Proposed] Order (C 14-1857 JST (PR))