Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Doe v. Kern County

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

October 2, 2013

KNOWN DOE PLAINTIFFS, 1-4, and UNKNOWN DOE PLAINTIFFS, 5 through 1, 000, 000, individuals, Plaintiffs,
v.
KERN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, CLERK, MARY B. BEDARD, an individual; CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE, DEBRA BOWEN, an individual; EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD, SELVI STANISLAUS, an individual; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, an agency of the United States of America; ACTING COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, DANIEL I. WERFEL, in his official and individual capacities; and Doe Defendants 1 through 1000, inclusive, Defendants.

KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672, Attorney General of California, MARC A. LEFORESTIER, State Bar No. 178188, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, NANCY J. DOIG, State Bar No. 226593, Deputy Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, Attorneys for Office of Secretary of State and Selvi Stanislaus, Executive Officer of the Franchise Tax Board.

BOBBY L. CLOUD, JR. (SBN 258081), Attorneys for Known Doe Plaintiffs.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE, EXTENDING THE DEADLINE FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND SELVI STANISLAUS TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS, AND ALLOWING PLAINTIFFS TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT

JENNIFER L. THURSTON, District Judge.

WHEREAS, UPON INFORMATION AND BELIEF:

A. Known Doe Plaintiffs filed the instant action on June 24, 2013. The instant action raises questions about the way opposite sex and same sex partnerships are recognized under federal and state law.

B. On June 26, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued decisions in Hollingsworth v. Perry , 133 S.Ct. 2652 (2013) (finding that California's Proposition 8, which amended the California Constitution to define marriage as only between a man and a woman, violated the United States Constitution) and U.S. v. Windsor , 133 S.Ct. 2675 (2013) (finding that the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage under federal law as only between a man and a woman, violated the United States Constitution), which made significant changes to the legal landscape regarding how opposite sex partnerships are recognized in both California and throughout the United States.

C. Plaintiffs experienced unanticipated difficulties in serving both the California defendants (the California Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, and the Executive Officer of the California Franchise Tax Board, Selvi Stanislaus) and United States defendants (the United States of America, the Internal Revenue Service, and Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Daniel I. Werfel) named in this action. In fact, the United States defendants have still not been served, though Plaintiffs' counsel believes he has identified the source of the problems with service and plans to effect service soon.

D. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(a) the United States defendants will have more time from the date they are served in which to respond than the California defendants.

E. The court has set a mandatory scheduling conference in this matter for October 8, 2013, with a joint statement of all the parties due on October 1, 2013. However, due to service problems mentioned above, the Secretary of State's response to the complaint currently is not due until October 3, 2013 and Stanislaus's response to the complaint currently is not due until October 4, 2013. That is, both California Defendants' responses to the complaint are not due until after the deadline to file a joint statement. Additionally, once the United States defendants are served, Plaintiffs will likely amend the complaint to more accurately reflect the current state of the law as Plaintiffs see it in light of the decisions in Hollingsworth and Windsor . If no amendment is made, the Complaint will be the subject of a motion to strike and a dispositive motion for judgment on the pleadings.

F. The California Defendants and Plaintiffs all believe it would be easier for all parties to coordinate their schedules in this matter if the defendants were operating with the same deadlines.

AS SUCH PLAINTIFFS AND THE STATE DEFENDANTS STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS:

1. Plaintiffs may amend to the complaint in this action in light of recent changes in the law which transpired after the instant action was filed;

2. Debra Bowen, the California Secretary of State and Selvi Stanislaus, Executive Officer of the California Franchise Tax Board and all the United States Entities shall have until the latest date a responsive pleading is due from any of the defendants to file their responsive pleadings so that all parties will be on the same schedule; and

3. The mandatory scheduling conference currently set for October 8, 2013 shall be continued to a date that is after January 1, 2014, according to the convenience of the court.

ORDER ON STIPULATION

Based upon the stipulation of the parties:

1. Plaintiffs may amend the complaint in this action in light of recent changes in the law which transpired after the instant action was filed but must do so before any defendant appears in the action or they must seek leave of the Court for file an amended complaint;

2. Debra Bowen, the California Secretary of State and Selvi Stanislaus, Executive Officer of the California Franchise Tax Board and all the United States defendants shall have until the latest date a responsive pleading is due from any of the defendants to file their responsive pleadings so that all defendants will be on the same schedule; and

3. The mandatory scheduling conference currently set for December 5, 2013 shall be continued to January 8, 2014 at 9:30 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.