Chadam et al v. Palo Alto Unified School District
Filing
53
ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken GRANTING 52 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/21/2014)
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
5
JAMES CHADAM and JENNIFER CHADAM,
individually and on behalf of
their minor children A.C. and
C.C.,
6
Plaintiffs,
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
No. C 13-4129 CW
ORDER GRANTING
MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO FILE A MOTION
TO RECONSIDER
(Docket No. 52)
v.
PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT, a governmental entity
created and existing under the
laws of the State of California,
Defendant.
________________________________/
12
Plaintiffs James and Jennifer Chadam, on behalf of themselves
13
14
and their minor children A.C. and C.C. (the Chadams), move for
15
leave to file a motion to reconsider the Court’s November 4, 2014
16
Order dismissing their Second Amended Complaint against Palo Alto
17
Unified School District (PAUSD).
18
filed by the Chadams, the Court GRANTS their motion for leave to
19
file a motion for reconsideration.
20
I.
Having considered the papers
Leave to File a Motion for Reconsideration
21
Civil Local Rule 7-9(a) provides, “No party may notice a
22
motion for reconsideration without first obtaining leave of Court
23
to file the motion.”
24
reconsideration may only be granted if the moving party shows: (1)
25
that “at the time of the motion for leave, a material difference
26
in fact or law exists from that which was presented to the Court
27
before entry of the interlocutory order for which reconsideration
28
is sought”; (2) “the emergence of new material facts or change of
A request for leave to file a motion for
1
law occurring after the time of such order”; or (3) “a manifest
2
failure by the Court to consider material facts or dispositive
3
legal arguments which were presented to the Court before such
4
interlocutory order.”
5
II.
Civil L.R. 7-9(b).
Discussion
6
While the Court finds that the Chadams’ motion for leave
7
fails to articulate any new material facts, any change of law
8
after the order was issued, or any failure by the Court to
9
consider material facts, the Court will nonetheless grant them
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
leave to file a motion for reconsideration that meets the standard
11
above.
12
more than ten pages.
13
orders one, and the motion will not be granted unless an
14
opposition is called for.
Within seven days, the Chadams may file a motion of no
No opposition need be filed unless the Court
CONCLUSION
15
16
For the reasons set forth above, the Court GRANTS the
17
Chadams’ request for leave to file a motion for reconsideration
18
(Docket No. 52).
19
20
21
22
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
November 21, 2014
CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?