Ashker et al v. Schwarzenegger et al

Filing 339

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS 331 MOTION TO AMEND THE SCHEDULE AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS 334 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/20/2014)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
No. C 09-5796 CW

8
9

TODD ASHKER, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
v.

11
12

EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., et al.,
Defendants.

13
14
15

________________________________/
I.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER GRANTING IN
PART PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION TO AMEND
THE SCHEDULE AND
DENYING
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO FILE
A MOTION FOR
PARTIAL SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
(Docket Nos. 331,
334)

Motion to Amend the Schedule
On November 13, 2014, Plaintiffs Todd Ashker, et al., filed a

motion for administrative relief asking the Court to amend the
previous case management schedule and to set new dates for
discovery and briefing on case-dispositive motions.
331.

Docket No.

Defendants, Governor Edmund G. Brown, et al., have not

responded to the motion.

The Court has reviewed the motion and

grants it in part.
The Court now sets the following amended schedule:
Event
Completion
Discovery
Disclosure
Identities
Reports of
Witnesses

of Fact
of
and
Expert

Existing Date
11/28/14
1/30/15

Amended Date
12/29/14 (extension
only for depositions)
2/13/15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14

Rebuttal Expert
Reports
Completion of Expert
Discovery
Plaintiffs’ Opening
Brief on Motion for
Summary Judgment
Defendants’
Opposition and CrossMotion (contained
within a single
brief)
Plaintiffs’
Reply/Opposition
(contained within a
single brief)
Defendants’ Reply
Further Case
Management Conference
and Case-Dispositive
Motion Deadline
Final Pretrial
Conference
Trial

15

2/27/15

3/13/15

5/1/15

5/15/15

7/2/15

7/2/15

7/30/15

7/30/15

8/20/15

8/20/15

8/27/15
9/17/15

8/27/15
9/17/15

11/18/15

11/18/15

12/7/15

12/7/15

The Court will not alter the dates for case-dispositive

16

motions, the pretrial conference or trial.

17

they may stipulate to change any discovery or briefing deadlines

18

that do not impact these dates.

19

schedule must ensure that the cross-motions for summary judgment

20

are fully briefed at least three weeks before the hearing date.

21

II.

22
23
24
25

If the parties agree,

Any modification to the briefing

Motion for Leave to File a Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment
Plaintiffs have also filed an administrative motion for leave

to file a motion for partial summary judgment.
Defendants oppose the motion.

Docket No. 334.

Having considered the parties’

papers and the record in the case, the Court DENIES the motion.

26

If the parties can agree to a stipulated briefing schedule, the

27

Court will hear all motions for summary judgment on an earlier

28
2

1

date.

2

judgment.

3

The Court will not hear multiple motions for summary

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5

Dated:

November 20, 2014

CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3