Barajas et al v. City of Rhonert Park

Filing 89

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James granting 88 Stipulation Staying Case. (rmm2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2016)

1
2
3
4

DAVID F. BEACH (SBN: 127135)
SCOTT A. LEWIS (SBN: 149094)
PERRY, JOHNSON, ANDERSON, MILLER &
MOSKOWITZ, LLP
438 1st Street, 4th Floor
Santa Rosa, California 95401
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

5
6

Attorneys for Defendants
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, JACY TATUM, DAVID
RODRIGUEZ and MATTHEW SNODGRASS

7
8
9
10
11

ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ (CA SBN 121490)
[e-mail]
CAITLIN SINCLAIRE BLYTHE (CA SBN 265024)
[e-mail]
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]

12
13

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
RAUL BARAJAS
ELVA BARAJAS

14
15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

18
19

RAUL BARAJAS and
ELVA BARAJAS,

20
Plaintiffs,
21
v.
22
23
24

CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, a municipal
corporation; and JACY TATUM, DAVID
RODRIQUEZ and MATTHEW SNODGRASS,
officers with the City of Rohnert Park Police
Department,

Case No. 3:14-cv-05157 MEJ
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER SEEKING STAY OF
PROCEEDINGS PENDING
DECISION FROM NINTH CIRCUIT
COURT OF APPEALS REGARDING
THE PARTIES’ PETITIONS FOR
APPEAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b)

25
26

Defendants.
Complaint filed: November 21, 2014

27
28
STIP. RE STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Case No. 3:14-cv-05157 MEJ

1

1

Plaintiffs Raul Barajas and Elva Barajas (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants City of Rohnert

2

Park, Jacy Tatum, David Rodriquez and Matthew Snodgrass (“Defendants”), through their

3

undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:

4
5
6

WHEREAS, on August 10, 2016, the Court entered the Order Re: Motion for Summary
Judgment and Sua Sponte Certifying Issues for Appeal (the “Order”);
WHEREAS, the Order sua sponte certified two issues for interlocutory appeal under 28

7

U.S.C. § 1292(b) and ordered the parties to meet and confer and within 30 days of the Order’s

8

issuance submit a proposal regarding whether the action should be stayed;

9
10
11

WHEREAS, the parties filed separate petitions seeking appellate review under § 1292(b)
of one or both issues certified by the district court;
WHEREAS, the parties have met and conferred and agree that a stay of the proceedings

12

before this Court pending resolution of the parties’ petitions by the Ninth Circuit Court of

13

Appeals, either through an order declining to accept certification of both issues or a ruling on the

14

appeal of one or both issues, is appropriate and would promote economy of time and effort;

15
16
17

WHEREAS, the parties shall promptly inform the Court if the Ninth Circuit declines to
accept certification of one or both certified issues; and
WHEREAS, Defendants and Plaintiffs propose the following: A stay of the proceedings

18

before this Court should be entered pending resolution of the parties’ petitions by the Ninth

19

Circuit Court of Appeals, either through an order declining to accept certification of both issues

20

or a ruling on the appeal of one or both issues.

21

THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE, subject to the approval of the Court, that a stay

22

of the proceedings before this Court should be entered pending resolution of the parties’ petitions

23

by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, either through an order declining to accept certification of

24

both issues or a ruling on the appeal of one or both issues.

25

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

26
27
28
STIP. RE STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Case No. 3:14-cv-05157 MEJ

2

1

Dated: August 23, 2016

2

ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ
CAITLIN SINCLAIRE BLYTHE
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

3
4
5

By: /s/ Arturo J. González
ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ

6

Attorney for Raul Barajas and Elva Barajas

7

Dated: August 23, 2016
SCOTT LEWIS
DAVID F. BEACH
PERRY, JOHNSON, ANDERSON, MILLER &
MOSKOWITZ LLP

8
9
10
11

By: /s/ Scott Lewis
SCOTT LEWIS

12

Attorney for City of Rohnert Park

13
14

FILER’S ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 5-1(i)(3)
15
16
17
18

I, Arturo J. González, hereby certify that I am the ECF user whose identification and password
are being used to file the foregoing Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Seeking Stay of
Proceedings Pending Decision From Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Regarding the Parties’
Petitions for Appeal Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) and that the above-referenced signatory to this
stipulation has conferred in this filing.
/s/ Arturo J. González__________

19
20
21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23
24

Dated: __________________, 2016 __________________________________
August 24,

25

Hon. Maria-Elena James
sf-3687450

26
27
28
STIP. RE STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Case No. 3:14-cv-05157 MEJ

3