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.

Davis v. California Department of Corrections

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

October 16, 2013

BRENDA DAVIS and DAVID ROY, Plaintiffs,
v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al., Defendants.

Christopher Lundberg, Oregon OSB No. 941084 Matthew E. Malmsheimer, OSB No. 033847 Haglund Kelley LLP, Portland, Oregon 97201, Admitted Pro Hac Vice.

David Springfield, Calif. SBN 226630 The Springfield Law Firm, Oregon House, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff BRENDA DAVIS.

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Attorney General of California, Karen Kiyo Lowhurst, Bonnie Chen, Calif SBN 219349, Deputy Attorneys General, Attorneys for Defendants CDCR, Mandel, & McCarthy.

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING RESPONSE AND REPLY DEADLINES FOR SUPPLEMENTAL MOTIONS IN LIMINE

SAUNDRA B. ARMSTRONG, District Judge.

TO THE HONORABLE COURT AND THE CLERK OF THE COURT:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT THE undersigned counsel of record for plaintiffs and defendants hereby stipulate and request that the Court enter the following order:

The parties have recently filed Supplemental Motions In Limine. Dkt. Nos. 234 & 237. The parties jointly and respectfully request that the Court set the deadline for Responses to those Motions two weeks from the date of filing, with the deadline for filing any Reply three weeks from the date of filing of the Supplemental Motion. For Dkt. No 234, that will make Defendants' Response due on October 25, 2013 with Plaintiff's Reply, if any, due on November 1, 2013. For Dkt. No. 237, that will make Plaintiff's Response due on October 28, with Defendants' Reply, if any, due on November 4, 2013. These deadlines will permit the parties to address the issues raised in the Supplemental Motions in Limine, are consistent with the Court's Standing order on Pretrial Preparation, and will not affect any of the other scheduled deadlines.

Accordingly, there is good cause for the request.

Based on the agreement of the parties, and good cause appearing, it is SO ORDERED. Defendants' Response to Dkt. No 234 is due on October 25, 2013, with Plaintiff's Reply, if any, due on November 1, 2013. Plaintiff's Response to Dkt. No. 237 is due on October 28, with Defendants' Reply, if any, due on November 4, 2013.


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.