Jordan v. The Presidio Trust et al

Filing 35

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND re 32 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER : Stipulated Request to Modify Briefing Schedule filed by The U.S. Equal Opportunity Commission, Patricia Jordan, The Presidio Trust. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 9/21/16. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/21/2016)

1 TIMOTHY S. THIMESCH, ESQ. (No. 148213)
[e-mail]
2 THIMESCH LAW OFFICES, PLC
158 Hilltop Crescent
3 Walnut Creek, CA 94576-3452
Direct: [phone]
4 Facsimile: [phone]
5 Attorney for Plaintiff PATRICIA JORDAN
6
BENJAMIN C. MIZER
7 Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General
CARLOTTA WELLS
8 Assistant Branch Director, Federal Programs Branch, Civil Division
LISA ZEIDNER MARCUS (N.Y. Bar 4461679) - Trial Attorney
[e-mail]
9
United States Department of Justice
10 Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, 7th Floor
11 Washington, D.C. 20530
Telephone: [phone]
12 Facsimile: [phone]
13 Attorneys for Defendants, PRESIDIO TRUST and THE U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
14
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION

16
17
18
PATRICIA JORDAN,
19
Plaintiff,
20 v.

21 PRESIDIO TRUST, and THE U.S. EQUAL
EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
22 COMMISSION,
23
24
25
26
27
28

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 16-cv-02122 KAW

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER
CHANGING TIME TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT AND TO
MODIFY BRIEFING SCHEDULE

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-1(b) and 6-2 of the Northern District of California,

2

plaintiff Patricia Jordan (“plaintiff”) and defendants the Presidio Trust and the U.S. Equal

3

Employment Opportunity Commission (collectively, “defendants”), by and through their

4

respective counsel, respectfully submit this stipulated request to: (1) extend the time for

5

defendant to respond to plaintiffs’ Complaint, and (2) modify the briefing schedule for

6

defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss as follows, as follows:

7

1.

Defendants intend to respond to plaintiff’s Complaint by filing a motion to

8

dismiss. Under the current schedule, defendants’ response (motion) is due on September 16,

9

2016; plaintiff’s opposition to the motion is due two weeks later, on September 30, 2016; and

10
11

defendants’ reply is due the following week, on October 7, 2016;
2.

The parties agree that the briefing schedule should be modified due to the

12

anticipated complexity of defendants’ forthcoming motion, which defendants represent will raise

13

jurisdictional issues and will also argue that plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief

14

will be granted. The commentary to the Civil Local Rules instructs that the default two weeks

15

for an opposition and one week for a reply “are minimum time periods,” and that for “complex

16

motions,” such as the one that defendants anticipate filing here, “parties are encouraged to

17

stipulate or seek a Court order establishing a longer notice period with correspondingly longer

18

periods for response or reply.” Civil. L.R. 7-2 Commentary.

19

3.

In addition, defendants represent that their motion must be reviewed by multiple

20

federal agencies before it can be filed, and additional time is needed due to the press of business.

21

Similarly, the press of business informs the parties’ agreement that the timeframes for the

22

opposition and the reply should be enlarged, since counsel for the parties must also continue their

23

work on other matters during the time allowed for the briefing here.

24

4.

For these reasons, the parties request that the Court enter the following stipulated

25

briefing schedule: defendants’ motion to dismiss due by Monday, September 26; plaintiffs’

26

opposition due by Friday, November 4; defendants’ reply due by Thursday, Nov. 17.

27
28
—2—

5.

1

The requested briefing schedule will alter the current deadline (of September 16)

2

for defendants’ response to the Complaint. One prior extensions of time has previously been

3

requested and granted; on August 30, 2016, the Court granted defendants’ request to extend the

4

deadline for responding to the Complaint. See ECF No. 30.
6.

5

The requested time modification will not alter any other event or deadline. The

6

next case management conference in this case is scheduled for November 29, 2016 at 1:30pm,

7

and the parties are to file a Case Management Statement by November 22.
IT IS SO STIPULATED AND REQUESTED.

8
9
10

Dated: September 16, 2016

/s/ Timothy S. Thimesch
TIMOTHY S. THIMESCH, ESQ.
THIMESCH LAW OFFICES
Attorneys for Plaintiff PATRICIA JORDAN

Dated: September 16, 2016

/s/ Lisa Zeidner Marcus
.
LISA ZEIDNER MARCUS 1
Counsel for Defendants
PRESIDIO TRUST; and THE U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

[Proposed] ORDER
19
20

Pursuant to stipulation, it is SO ORDERED.

21
22

9/21/16
DATE: ________________________

23

______________________________________________
HON. KANDIS A. WESTMORE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

1

I, Lisa Zeidner Marcus, hereby attest, in accordance with the Civil L.R. 5-1(i)(3), the concurrence in
the filing of this document has been obtained from the other signatory listed here.

—3—