United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND BY FOURTEEN DAYS
DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO FILE ITS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS
SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ITS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S
CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, Jr., District Judge.
Pursuant
to Rule 6(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
Local Civil Rule 6-2, Defendant requests and the parties, by
and through undersigned counsel, have conferred and hereby
stipulate to and respectfully request that (1) the Court
extend the deadline by fourteen days to July 15 for Defendant
to file its combined opposition to Plaintiff's
cross-motion for summary judgment and its reply in support of
its motion for summary judgment; and (2) the Court
correspondingly extend by fourteen days to August 8 the
deadline for Plaintiff's reply in support of its
cross-motion for summary judgment. The parties are not
requesting that the Court reschedule the August 18, 2016
hearing date on those motions and stipulate that, subject to
the Court's approval, the hearing can proceed as
scheduled on that date.
Defendant
provides the following bases in support of its request:
1. On
January 21, 2016, the parties submitted a stipulated request
to, inter alia, set a summary judgment briefing schedule.
See ECF No. 25. Thereafter, the Court adopted the
parties' proposed schedule and set the following dates
for briefing:
a. May 9, 2016 for Defendant's motion for summary
judgment.
b. June 10, 2016 for Plaintiff's opposition to
Defendant's motion, and any cross-motion for summary
judgment by Plaintiff.
c. July 1, 2016 for Defendant's reply in support of
Defendant's motion for summary judgment and opposition to
Plaintiff's cross-motion.
d. July 25, 2016 for Plaintiff's reply in support of
Plaintiff's cross-motion.
2. Pursuant to this briefing schedule, Defendant filed its
summary judgment motion on May 9, 2016, and Plaintiff filed
its cross-motion for summary judgment and opposition to
Defendant's motion on June 10, 2016. See ECF
Nos. 30, 37. On that same date, non-parties the Reporters
Committee for Freedom of the Press and thirty-seven
additional media organizations filed a motion to file an
amicus brief in support of Plaintiff's
opposition to Defendant's motion for summary judgment
(and a proposed amicus brief) . See ECF No.
36.
3.
Defendant needs a fourteen-day extension of its current
deadline from July 1 to July 15 to complete its combined
opposition to Plaintiff's motion and reply in support of
its motion. Consistent with the parties' stipulation to
exceed page limits (and this Court's order granting that
stipulation), Plaintiff's June 10 memorandum is 35 pages,
and it challenges both the adequacy of the FBI's search
and Vaughn showing, as well as a large number of
specific withholdings. Although undersigned counsel has been
working diligently on this case, given the number of issues
raised by Plaintiff's filing and the proposed
amicus brief as well as the press of other matters,
undersigned counsel requires additional time to coordinate
with his client and complete Defendant's combined reply
in support of its summary judgment motion and opposition to
Plaintiff's cross-motion.
4.
Defendant also seeks a concomitant fourteen-day extension for
Plaintiff's current deadline for its reply in support of
its motion for summary judgment from July 25 to August 8.
5. Both
parties request that the hearing date for these motions
remain on August 18, 2016. However, both parties also state
that they have no objection to rescheduling the hearing date
should the Court believe doing so is necessary in light of
this stipulation.
LOCAL
RULE 5-1(i) ATTESTATION
I
attest that I have obtained Marcia Hofmann's concurrence
...