Smith v. Diaz et al

Filing 29

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 27 Stipulation to Extend Deadline for Plaintiff to Oppose Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/19/2021)

Case 4:20-cv-04335-HSG Document 29 Filed 07/19/21 Page 1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Felicia Medina (SBN 255804)
[e-mail]
Jennifer Orthwein (SBN 255196)
[e-mail]
Shauna Madison (SBN 299585)
[e-mail]
MEDINA ORTHWEIN LLP
230 Grand Avenue, Suite 201
Oakland, CA 94610
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff C. Jay Smith

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISON

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

C. JAY SMITH (a/k/a CARY KEETON SMITH),

Case No. 4:20-cv-04335-HSG

Plaintiff,
v.
RALPH DIAZ; RON DAVIS; T. DUKE; R.
FESTON; B. HAUB; M. BLOISE; Y. FRANCO; and
M. TAYLOR,
Defendants.

19

JOINT STIPULATION AND
ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE
FOR PLAINTIFF TO OPPOSE
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO
DISMISS
Judge: Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
Trial Date: Not Set
Action Filed: June 29, 2020

20
21

Under Local Rule 6-2, Plaintiff C. Jay Smith (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Diaz, Davis, Duke,

22

Feston, Haub, Bloise, Franco, and Taylor (collectively “Defendants”), by and through their respective

23

counsel of record, hereby stipulate and jointly request as follows:

24
25
26
27
28

WHEREAS, on March 17, 2021, Defendants requested, through a joint stipulation, a first
extension of time of sixty (60) days to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No. 15);
WHEREAS, on May 21, 2021, the Court ordered Defendants to file a response within twenty-one
(21) days (ECF No. 19);
WHEREAS, on June 9, 2021, Defendants’ counsel contacted Plaintiff’s counsel by email and
Joint Stipulation & Order to Extend Deadline for Plaintiff to Oppose Motion to Dismiss
Case No. 4:20-cv-04335-HSG

1

Case 4:20-cv-04335-HSG Document 29 Filed 07/19/21 Page 2 of 3

1

requested an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint;

2

WHEREAS, on June 10, 2021, the Parties met and conferred telephonically about Defendants’

3

request for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint. As a result of the meet and confer

4

process, the Parties agreed to extend Defendants’ deadline to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint by twenty-

5

one (21) days and to reciprocally extend Plaintiff’s deadline to oppose Defendants’ motion to dismiss by

6

twenty-one (21) days, in the event that Defendants file a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff’s counsel’s request

7

for an extension of time was based on the additional barriers Plaintiff’s counsel face to communicate with

8

Plaintiff due to the nature of incarceration;

9

WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Defendants requested, through a joint stipulation, a second

10

extension of time of twenty-one (21) days for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint and a

11

reciprocal extension for Plaintiff to oppose Defendants’ motion to dismiss, in the event that Defendants

12

file a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 23);

13
14
15
16
17
18

WHEREAS, on June 14, 2021, the Court granted Defendants’ second extension of time of twentyone (21) days to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No. 24);
WHEREAS, on July 2, 2021, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss Certain Defendants and Claims
in Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 25);
WHEREAS, the Parties believe good cause exists to extend Plaintiff’s deadline to oppose
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Certain Defendants and Claims in Plaintiff’s Complaint;

19

WHEREAS, the Parties previously agreed to a reciprocal extension of time to respond to

20

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Certain Defendants and Claims in Plaintiff’s Complaint during the June

21

10, 2021 telephonic meet and confer; and

22

WHEREAS, the Parties do not believe that the twenty-one (21) day extension of Plaintiff’s

23

deadline to respond to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Certain Defendants and Claims in Plaintiff’s

24

Complaint will have a significant effect on the schedule for the case;

25

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the Parties, through their

26

respective counsel of record, and subject to Court approval, that Plaintiff’s deadline to oppose Defendants’

27

Motion to Dismiss Certain Defendants and Claims in Plaintiff’s Complaint be extended by twenty-one

28

(21) days, up to and including August 13, 2021.
Joint Stipulation & Order to Extend Deadline for Plaintiff to Oppose Motion to Dismiss
Case No. 4:20-cv-04335-HSG

2

Case 4:20-cv-04335-HSG Document 29 Filed 07/19/21 Page 3 of 3

1
2
3

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: July 12, 2021

/s/ Janet N. Chen
Janet N. Chen, Deputy Attorney General
Attorney for Defendants

Dated: July 12, 2021

/s/ Jennifer Orthwein
Jennifer Orthwein, Medina Orthwein LLP
Attorney for Plaintiff

4
5
6
7
8

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10
11

Dated: 7/19/2021

____________________________________
Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.
U.S. District Court Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Joint Stipulation & Order to Extend Deadline for Plaintiff to Oppose Motion to Dismiss
Case No. 4:20-cv-04335-HSG

3