From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rocha v. State Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 24, 2012
Case No. 1:11-cv-01954-LJO-BAM (E.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 1:11-cv-01954-LJO-BAM

07-24-2012

LINDA ROCHA, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, J. CLARK KELSO, RECEIVER, CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE SERVICES, Defendants.

WILLIAM A. ROMAINE Attorney for Plaintiff LINDA ROCHA MARY HORST Attorney for Defendant CDCR JAIME G. TOUCHSTONE Attorney for Defendant Clark Kelso


KAMALA D. HARRIS

Attorney General of California

SCOTT H. WYCKOFF

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

MARY HORST

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendant CDCR

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE:

FILING DATE FOR DEFENDANT'S

RESPONSIVE PLEADING


Judge: The Honorable Lawrence J. O'Neill

Action Filed: November 18, 2011

THE PARTIES HERETO, BY AND THROUGH THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

Plaintiff Linda Rocha ("Plaintiff") and Defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"), collectively referred to as "Parties" unless otherwise specifically referred to, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. On or about November 18, 2011, Plaintiff filed the instant action.

2. On or about May 3, 2012, Clark Kelso answered the Complaint.

3. On or about July 3, 2012, Plaintiff served CDCR. A responsive pleading is due from CDCR by July 24, 2012.

4. In a letter dated July 18, 2012, Plaintiff represented she intends to file an amended complaint with this court.

5. To preserve party and judicial resources, the Parties desire that Plaintiff file an amended complaint before the CDCR proceeds with the filing of a responsive pleading.

6. The Parties therefore propose that any responsive pleading on behalf of CDCR shall be filed no later than 20 days after Plaintiff files an Amended Complaint.

7. The Parties respectfully request that the Court enter this stipulation as an order.

IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED:

______________

WILLIAM A. ROMAINE

Attorney for Plaintiff LINDA ROCHA

______________

MARY HORST

Attorney for Defendant CDCR

______________

JAIME G. TOUCHSTONE

Attorney for Defendant Clark Kelso

ORDER

Based on the Stipulation of the parties (Doc. 17), and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS the parties' request to continue CDCR's deadline to file an Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint. CDCR shall file their Answer no later than 20 days after Plaintiff files an Amended Complaint.

Additionally, the Court CONTINUES the Initial Scheduling Conference currently set for August 22, 2012 (Doc. 15) to September 20, 2012, at 8:30 AM, in Courtroom 8, before the Honorable Barbara A. McAuliffe. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Barbara A. McAuliffe

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Rocha v. State Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 24, 2012
Case No. 1:11-cv-01954-LJO-BAM (E.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2012)
Case details for

Rocha v. State Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.

Case Details

Full title:LINDA ROCHA, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS…

Court:SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 24, 2012

Citations

Case No. 1:11-cv-01954-LJO-BAM (E.D. Cal. Jul. 24, 2012)