Burke et al v. Brentwood Union School District et al
Filing
168
STIPULATION AND ORDER 166 : Motion Hearing reset for 3/14/2017 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom E, 15th Floor, San Francisco before Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte. Plaintiffs' supplemental opposition due 2/10/2017; defendants' supplemental reply brief due 2/23/2017. Signed by Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte on 1/17/2017. (afmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/17/2017)
1
2
3
4
5
PETER W. ALFERT, SBN 83139
IAN HANSEN, SBN 255449
LAW OFFICES OF PETER ALFERT, PC
200 Pringle Ave., Suite 450
Walnut Creek, California 94596
Telephone: (925) 279-3009
Facsimile: (925) 279-3342
8
TODD BOLEY, SBN 64119
ZOYA YARNYKH, SBN 258062
LAW OFFICE OF TODD BOLEY
2831 Mariner Square Dr., Suite 280
Alameda, CA 94501
Telephone: (510) 836-4500
Facsimile: (510) 649-5170
9
Attorneys for PLAINTIFFS
6
7
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12
13
NATALIE BURKE and M.B., a minor by and
through her guardian ad litem NATALIE
BURKE,
No. 3:15-cv-00286 EDL
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
14
15
16
17
Plaintiffs,
v.
BRENTWOOD UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT,
MATTHEW DAILEY, KELLY MANKE,
JENNIFER WHITNEY, DANA EATON, and
DOES 1-30,
Before Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte
TRIAL: May 30, 2017
18
Defendants.
19
20
The parties to the above captioned action hereby stipulate by and through their undersigned
21
counsel of record as follows:
22
WHEREAS, on November 22, 2016, the Court entered an Order (Docket 161) modifying the
23
schedule surrounding defendants Motion for Summary Judgment setting the deadline for Plaintiffs’
24
to file their Supplemental Opposition to Defendants’Motion on January 31, 2017, setting the
25
deadline for Defendants to file their Supplemental Reply Brief on February 14, 2017 and setting
26
the hearing on Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment on February 28, 2017; and
27
WHEREAS, after this briefing schedule was set, between December 6, 2016 and January 17,
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
-1-
3:15-cv-00286 EDL
1
2017, defendant, Brentwood Union School District has produced approximately 20,170 pages of
2
additional ESI to plaintiffs; and
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
WHEREAS, the parties continue to meet and confer regarding additional issues relating to the
production of responsive ESI;
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between Plaintiffs and Defendants, by and through
their respective counsel, that:
1. The parties respectfully request that the Court continue the following deadlines as set
forth herein:
a. Plaintiffs’Supplemental Opposition to Defendants’Motion for Summary
10
10
Judgment shall be filed on February 14, 2017.
23
11
b. Defendants’Supplemental Reply Brief shall be filed on February 28, 2017.
12
c. The hearing on Defendants’Motion for Summary Judgment shall be continued
13
14
to March 14, 2017.
Date: January 17, 2017
15
Peter W. Alfert /s/
PETER W. ALFERT
Attorney for PLAINTIFFS
16
17
LAW OFFICES OF PETER ALFERT, P.C.
Date: January 17, 2017
EDRINGTON, SHIRMER & MURPHY LLP
18
Dolores Donohoe /s/
TIMOTHY MURPHY
DOLORES M. DONOHOE
Attorney for Defendant
BRENTWOOD UNION SCHOOL
DISTRICT
19
20
21
22
23
Date: January 17, 2017
24
LEONE & ALBERTS
Louis Leone /s/
LOUIS LEONE
CLAUDIA LEED
Attorney for Defendants
MATTHEW DAILEY, KELLY
MANKE, JENNIFER WHTNEY and
DANA EATON
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
-2-
3:15-cv-00286 EDL
1
ORDER AS MODIFIED
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
THE PARTIES HAVING STIPULATED THERETO AND GOOD CAUSE
APPEARING THEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that:
1. The hearing on defendants’Motion for Summary Judgment be continued to March 14,
2017;
2. Plaintiffs’Supplemental Opposition to the motion for summary judgment shall be filed
on February 14, 2017; and by 9:00 a.m. on February 10, 2017; and
3. Defendants’Supplemental Reply to motion for summary judgment shall be filed on
February 28, 2017. by 9:00 a.m. on February 23, 2017.
11
12
DATE: January 17, 2017
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
-3-
3:15-cv-00286 EDL
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?