Regents of University of California et al v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al

Filing 83

ORDER ADOPTING STIPULATED BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS by Judge William Alsup granting (82) Stipulation in case 3:17-cv-05211-WHA.Associated Cases: 3:17-cv-05211-WHA, 3:17-cv-05235-WHA, 3:17-cv-05329-WHA, 3:17-cv-05380-WHA, 3:17-cv-05813-WHA(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/19/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 CHAD A. READLER Acting Assistant Attorney General BRIAN STRETCH United States Attorney BRETT A. SHUMATE Deputy Assistant Attorney General JOHN. R. TYLER Assistant Branch Director BRAD P. ROSENBERG (DC Bar #467513) Senior Trial Counsel STEPHEN M. PEZZI (DC Bar #995500) KATE BAILEY (MD. Bar #1601270001) Trial Attorneys United States Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 Telephone: (202) 514-3374 Facsimile: (202) 616-8460 E-mail: brad.rosenberg@usdoj.gov 13 14 Attorneys for Defendants UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 16 17 18 19 REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA and JANET NAPOLITANO, in her official capacity as President of the University of California, 20 Plaintiffs, 21 22 23 24 25 26 No. 3:17-cv-05211-WHA No. 3:17-cv-05235-WHA No. 3:17-cv-05329-WHA No. 3:17-cv-05380-WHA No. 3:17-cv-05813-WHA v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY and ELAINE DUKE, in her official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, STIPULATION RE: BRIEFING SCHEDULE RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS PENDING RESOLUTION OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS Defendants. 27 28 All DACA Cases (Nos. 17-5211, 17-5235, 17-5329, 17-5380, 17-5813) STIPULATION RE: BRIEFING SCHEDULE RE: MOTION FOR STAY RE: MANDAMUS STIPULATION REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE 1 2 The parties agree, subject to the Court’s approval, to modify the briefing schedule for 3 Defendants’ Motion to Stay All Proceedings Pending Resolution of Petition for Writ of 4 Mandamus. In support thereof, the parties state as follows: 5 1. The United States intends to file a petition for a writ of mandamus in the United 6 States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit requesting that the Court of Appeals 7 direct this Court to vacate its Order issued on October 17, 2017, ECF No. 79, and to 8 stay discovery and further proceedings concerning the composition of the 9 administrative record pending a ruling on Defendants’ forthcoming motion to 10 dismiss. Defendants will apply for a writ of mandamus no later than Friday, October 11 20, 2017.1 12 2. On October 18, 2017, Defendants filed a motion to stay all proceedings in the related 13 DACA cases pending resolution of their forthcoming petition for a writ of mandamus. 14 3. In order to expedite the briefing schedule on Defendants’ motion to stay, the parties 15 have agreed to the following schedule: 16 a. Defendants’ motion and any supporting papers shall be filed by 9:00 p.m. on 17 October 18, 2017; 18 b. Plaintiffs agree to file their opposition and any supporting papers by 5:00 p.m. 19 on October 19, 2017; and 20 c. The parties have agreed to forego a hearing on Defendants’ motion to stay. If, 21 however, the Court wishes to hold a hearing, it will be noticed for Friday, 22 October 20, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard.2 23 24 25 1 26 All dates and times in this Stipulation refer to the local time for this Court (Pacific Daylight Time). 27 2 28 If the Court schedules a hearing, undersigned counsel for the Defendants requests that it take place no sooner than 2:00 p.m. on Friday, October 20, in order to allow counsel, who is based in Washington, DC, to make appropriate travel arrangements. Alternatively, undersigned counsel for defendants requests the ability to appear telephonically. All DACA Cases (Nos. 17-5211, 17-5235, 17-5329, 17-5380, 17-5813) STIPULATION RE: BRIEFING SCHEDULE RE: MOTION FOR STAY RE: MANDAMUS 1 4. Undersigned counsel for plaintiff State of California has conferred with other 2 plaintiffs’ counsel in the related DACA cases, who have authorized him to file this 3 stipulation on behalf of all plaintiffs. 4 IT IS SO STIPULATED THIS 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California /s/ James F. Zahradka II JAMES F. ZAHRADKA II Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Plaintiff State of California CHAD A. READLER Acting Assistant Attorney General BRIAN STRETCH United States Attorney BRETT A. SHUMATE Deputy Assistant Attorney General JOHN R. TYLER Assistant Branch Director 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 /s/ Brad P. Rosenberg BRAD P. ROSENBERG (DC Bar #467513) Senior Trial Counsel STEPHEN M. PEZZI (DC Bar #995500) KATE BAILEY (MD. Bar #1601270001) Trial Attorneys United States Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue N.W. Washington, DC 20530 Phone: (202) 514-3374 Fax: (202) 616-8460 Email: brad.rosenberg@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendants IT IS SO ORDERED THAT THE FOLLOWING BRIEFING SCHEDULE IS ADOPTED: For Defendants’ Motion to Stay All Proceedings Pending Resolution of Petition for Writ of Mandamus, the following briefing schedule is adopted: 28 All DACA Cases (Nos. 17-5211, 17-5235, 17-5329, 17-5380, 17-5813) STIPULATION RE: BRIEFING SCHEDULE RE: MOTION FOR STAY RE: MANDAMUS 1 2 3 4 5 a. Defendants’ motion and any supporting papers shall be filed by 9:00 p.m. on October 18, 2017; and b. Plaintiffs’ opposition and any supporting papers shall be filed by 5:00 p.m. on October 19, 2017. The Court will decide the motion on the parties’ written submissions. 6 7 8 ____________________________ WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 October 19, 2017. ____________________________ DATE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 All DACA Cases (Nos. 17-5211, 17-5235, 17-5329, 17-5380, 17-5813) STIPULATION RE: BRIEFING SCHEDULE RE: MOTION FOR STAY RE: MANDAMUS

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?