Godoy et al v. County of Sonoma, et al

Filing 98

ORDER REGARDING EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN OPPOSITION TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 06/28/2016. If plaintiffs intend to authenticate any documents to which defendants have objected, they should do so by July 1, 2016. Defendants may file any further evidentiary objections by July 5, 2016.(jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/28/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

JOSE LUIS GODOY, et al.,

Case No. 15-cv-00883-WHO

Plaintiffs,
8

ORDER REGARDING EVIDENCE
SUBMITTED IN OPPOSITION TO
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

v.
9
10

COUNTY OF SONOMA, et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Defendants filed objections to the evidence plaintiffs’ submitted in opposition to their

13

motion for summary judgment. Dkt. No. 97-1. One of defendants’ objections is that none of the

14

ten attachments to plaintiffs’ opposition brief was presented with a supporting affidavit or

15

declaration.

16

If plaintiffs intend to authenticate any documents to which defendants have objected, they

17

should do so by July 1, 2016. The Court notes that one submission indicated that two videos were

18

intended to be filed as evidence, but the Court has received only the video entitled “Andy Lopez

19

Supporters Cross Police Line, Youth Face Riot Cops.” Defendants’ may file any further

20

evidentiary objections by July 5, 2016.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Dated: June 28, 2016
______________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge