Fung et al v. Ray et al

Filing 41

ORDER RE 40 DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE AT HEARING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND AT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 3/21/2016. (blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/21/2016)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

JOHN FUNG, et al.,

Case No. 15-cv-04871-BLF

Plaintiffs,
8
v.
9
10

PATRICE JOHNSON RAY, et al.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST
FOR TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE AT
HEARING ON DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO DISMISS AND AT CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
[Re: ECF 40]

12
13
14

On March 18, 2016, Defendants filed a request for an order granting Defendants’ lead trial

15

counsel, Dennis J. Kelly, permission to appear telephonically at the hearing on Defendants’

16

motion to dismiss and the case management conference set for March 24, 2016.

17

The Court ordinarily does not permit telephonic appearances at motion hearings. Here,

18

Defendants filed the motion and their counsel is local. Absent some explanation why a telephonic

19

appearance is necessary, the Court will require an attorney who is fully prepared to present oral

20

argument and discuss scheduling issues to appear in person at the hearing and the case

21

management conference. That attorney need not be lead trial counsel, and lead trial counsel is

22

welcome to appear telephonically to listen in on the proceedings if another attorney appears in

23

person to argue on behalf of Defendants.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26
27
28

Dated: March 21, 2016
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge