Opinion
Case No. CV-11-05817 TEH
05-13-2013
RAFAEL MATEOS-SANDOVAL and SIMEON AVENDANO RUIZ, individually and as class representatives, Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF SONOMA, SONOMA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, STEVE FREITAS, CITY OF SANTA ROSA, SANTA ROSA POLICE DEPARTMENT, TOM SCHWEDHELM, and DOES 1 through 20, individually and in their official capacities, Defendants.
BRUCE D. GOLDSTEIN, State Bar No. 135970 County Counsel ANNE L. KECK, State Bar No. 136315 Deputy County Counsel Office of the Sonoma County Counsel Attorneys for Defendants the County of Sonoma, Sonoma County Sheriff's Office, and Sheriff-Coroner Steve Freitas
BRUCE D. GOLDSTEIN, State Bar No. 135970
County Counsel
ANNE L. KECK, State Bar No. 136315
Deputy County Counsel
Office of the Sonoma County Counsel
Attorneys for Defendants the
County of Sonoma, Sonoma County Sheriff's
Office, and Sheriff-Coroner Steve Freitas
JOINT STIPULATION TO (1) EXTEND
BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON MOTIONS TO
DISMISS, AND (2) RESCHEDULE
HEARINGS ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS
AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;
[PROPOSED] ORDER
This Joint Stipulation to (1) Extend Briefing Schedule on Motions to Dismiss, and (2) Reschedule Hearings on Motions to Dismiss is submitted by all named parties in this action, including: Plaintiffs Rafael Mateos-Sandoval and Simeon Avendano Ruiz (collectively, "Plaintiffs"); Defendants the County of Sonoma, Sonoma County Sheriff's Office, and Sonoma County Sheriff-Coroner Steve Freitas (collectively, "County Defendants"); and Defendants the City of Santa Rosa, Santa Rosa Police Department, and Santa Rosa Police Chief Tom Schwedhelm (collectively, "City Defendants"). Through this Stipulation, the parties agree to request a Court order to extend the briefing schedule for the pending motions to dismiss, and to reschedule the hearings on those motions as well as the case management conference, all of which are currently set for June 24, 2013. The parties submit that good cause supports their request, as set forth below.
RECITALS
A. In a previous Order filed on April 4, 2013 (Dkt. No. 88), the Court set a briefing schedule on Defendants' motions to dismiss, allowing them to be filed on April 12, 2013, with oppositions due on May 3, 2013, replies due on May 13, 2013, and setting a hearing date of June 3, 2013. Thereafter, based on an oral request made by County Counsel on April 8, 2013, the Court continued the hearings on the motions to dismiss to June 24, 2013, and set a further case management conference to be held that same day (Dkt. No. 91).
B. Pursuant to the scheduling Order, Defendants timely filed their motions to dismiss on April 12, 2013 (see Dkt. Nos. 93 and 95). However, Plaintiffs were unable to make the filing due dates for their oppositions due to scheduling conflicts, but filed their opposition to the City Defendants' motion to dismiss on May 6, 2013, and filed their opposition to the County Defendants' motion to dismiss on May 7, 2013.
C. Based on the attendant circumstances and on County Counsel's schedule, the parties have agreed to set a new schedule for the remainder of the briefing on the motions to dismiss and to reschedule the hearing date on those motions to July 29, 2013.
D. This extension of time is necessary to accommodate County Counsel's vacation schedule and briefing schedule in the appeal in this case and other cases.
E. In addition, to conserve the resources of the Court and the parties, the parties request that the further case management conference, currently scheduled to be held on June 24, 2013, be continued to July 29, 2013, at 10:00 am, so that it may be held concurrently with the hearings on the motions to dismiss.
WHEREFORE, the parties to this stipulation hereby agree and request entry of an order as follows:
STIPULATION
1. The parties request the Court to amend its Orders entered on April 4, 2013 (Dkt. No. 88) and April 8, 2013 (Dkt. No. 91) for the purpose of extending the briefing schedule on Defendants' pending motions to dismiss and rescheduling the hearing on those motions as follows:
Motions to Dismiss Replies Due: July 15, 2013
Proposed New Hearing Date: July 29, 2013, at 10:00 a.m.
2. In addition, the parties request the Court to reschedule the further case management conference, currently scheduled to be held on June 24, 2013, to July 29, 2013, at 10:00 am, so that it may be held concurrently with the hearings on the motions to dismiss.
3. Nothing in this Stipulation and request for order is intended to modify the other matters addressed in any Court order unless expressly identified herein, nor does it preclude the parties from seeking additional relief from this Court, to amend this stipulation and order or otherwise.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bruce D. Goldstein, Sonoma County Counsel
By: _______________
Anne L. Keck, Deputy County Counsel
Attorneys for County Defendants
Caroline L. Fowler, Santa Rosa City Attorney
By: _______________
Robert L. Jackson, Assistant City Attorney
Attorneys for City Defendants
Robert Mann & Donald W. Cook, Attorneys at Law
By: _______________
Donald W. Cook
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Pursuant to and in accordance with the foregoing Stipulation, and with good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. The Orders entered on April 4, 2013 (Dkt. No. 88) and April 8, 2013 (Dkt. No. 91) are hereby amended for the purpose of extending the briefing schedule on Defendants' pending motions to dismiss and rescheduling the hearing on those motions as follows:
Motions to Dismiss Replies Due: July 15, 2013
Motions to Dismiss Hearing Date: July 29, 2013, at 10:00 a.m.
2. The further case management conference in this case, currently scheduled to be held on June 24, 2013, is rescheduled to July 29, 2013, at 10:00 am, so that it may be held concurrently with the hearings on the motions to dismiss. IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________
HONORABLE THELTON E. HENDERSON