V. et al v. Wagner et al

Filing 94

ORDER by Judge Jeffrey S. White denying 14 Motion ; granting 19 Motion to Shorten Time; granting 86 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages (jswlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/6/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 V.L., et al., Plaintiffs, v. JOHN A. WAGNER, et al., Defendants. ORDER (1) GRANTING MOTION TO HEAR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION MOTION ON SHORTENED TIME; (2) SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE; AND (3) DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR EXPEDITED DISCOVERY No. C 09-04668 JSW IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 / Now before the Court is Plaintiffs' administrative motion to hear their motion for a preliminary injunction on shortened time. For good cause shown, the Court HEREBY GRANTS Plaintiffs' administrative motion for shortened time. The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' administrative motion to exceed the page limitations.1 The Court FURTHER ORDERS that Defendants shall file an opposition to the motion for preliminary injunction by no later than 2:00 p.m. on October 12, 2009. Defendants shall deliver directly to chambers a copy of their opposition papers by no later than 9:30 a.m. on October 13, 2009. Plaintiffs shall file their reply, if any, by no later than 2:00 p.m. on October 14, 2009. Plaintiffs shall deliver directly to chambers a copy of their reply papers by no later than 2:30 p.m. on October 14, 2009. The Court will conduct a hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction on October 19, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. The Court's Standing Orders provide page limitations that are more restrictive than the Local Rules. The Court construes Plaintiffs' motion as seeking relief from both the Local Rules and the Court's Standing Orders. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 If Defendants disagree with the legal proposition that "district courts are empowered to grant preliminary injunctions regardless of whether the class has been certified," see Branley v. Maxwell-Jolly, __ F. Supp. 2d __, 2009 WL 2941519, at *14 n.14 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 10, 2009), Defendants shall file an opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for class certification by no later than 2:00 p.m. on October 12, 2009. Defendants shall deliver directly to chambers a copy of their opposition papers by no later than 9:30 a.m. on October 13, 2009. If Defendants file an opposition to the motion for class certification, Plaintiffs shall file their reply, if any, by no later than 2:00 p.m. on October 14, 2009. Plaintiffs shall deliver directly to chambers a copy of their reply papers by no later than 2:30 p.m. on October 14, 2009. If Defendants agree with the above legal proposition and do not file an opposition by October 12, 2009, the Court will address Plaintiffs' motion for class certification at a later time. The Court DENIES Defendants' administrative motion to conduct limited discovery of the named Plaintiffs. The Court is amenable to continuing the hearing and briefing schedule on Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction if Defendants postpone the pending In-Home Support Services terminations and reductions, including sending out notice of such terminations or reductions. Such postponement shall be sufficient to enable both Plaintiffs and Defendants to conduct limited discovery with respect to the pending motion for preliminary injunction. IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: October 6, 2009 JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?