Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01779/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01779-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER

MARGUERITE MELO, SBN 167782

JOHN J. SARSFIELD, SBN 138971

LAW OFFICES OF MELO AND 

SARSFIELD, LLP

4216 South Mooney Blvd. PMB 136

Visalia, California 93277

Telephone: (559) 732-3000

Facsimile: (559) 732-3005

Email: meloandsarsfield@icloud.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff Paul Grenseman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Wendy Jones, Brian Jones and 

William Fabricius,

 Plaintiffs, 

 v.

Tulare County principals, 

employees and agents, Tulare 

County Sheriff’s Office, Tulare 

County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux, 

Tulare County Animal Control, 

TC AC Director Dr. Cheryl 

Duerksen, and the individuals 

TC ACO Paul Grenseman, 

TC ACO Jeffrey Lewis #1206, 

TC ACO Larry Hernandez, 

ACO Oren Hartley, 

TC HHSA Timothy Lutz and 

DOES 1 -100,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 1:15-CV-01779-EPG 

STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF 

TIME TO RESPOND TO 

COMPLAINT; ORDER

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and agreed by and between Plaintiffs Wendy 

Jones, Brian Jones, William Fabricius and Defendant Paul Grenseman, by and 

1

Case 1:15-cv-01779-LJO-EPG Document 40 Filed 08/18/16 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER

through their respective undersigned counsel that pursuant to Local Rule 144(a), 

the time in which Defendant Paul Grenseman may respond to Plaintiffs’ 

complaint be extended until September 2, 2016. This extension of time is due to 

the fact that Defendant Grenseman will need time to secure trial counsel to 

represent him as present Counsel (Law Offices of Melo and Sarsfield LLP) has a 

conflict.

/s/ Christine Garcia

Dated: August 12, 2016 ___________________________

Christine Garcia, Esq.

Attorney for Plaintiffs Wendy Jones, Brian 

Jones and William Fabricius

Dated: August 12, 2016 LAW OFFICES OF MELO AND 

SARSFIELD, LLP

/s/ John Sarsfield

By: _______________________________

 John Sarsfield, Esq.

 Attorneys for Plaintiff

///

///

///

///

///

2

Case 1:15-cv-01779-LJO-EPG Document 40 Filed 08/18/16 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER

ORDER

Based on the above stipulation, Defendant Paul Grenseman may file his 

responsive pleading to the First Amended Complaint no later than September 2, 

2016. The Court notes that Plaintiffs and all Defendants except for Defendant 

Grenseman have consented to the jurisdiction of a United States Magistrate Judge 

under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). (ECF Nos. 26, 29.) Defendant Grenseman is thus 

DIRECTED to either consent or decline to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction no later 

than September 2, 2016. The hearing on the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 34) and 

Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 37), currently set for September 2, 2016, is 

TAKEN OFF CALENDAR and will be re-set for hearing after the Court has 

received Defendant Grenseman’s responsive pleading(s) and consent/decline 

form. The briefing schedule for these motions remains unchanged; filing deadlines 

for the opposition and reply briefs remain as dictated by the noticed hearing date 

(i.e., September 2, 2016) and Local Rule 230(c) and (d).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2016 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01779-LJO-EPG Document 40 Filed 08/18/16 Page 3 of 3