Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05596/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-05596-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Civil Rights

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PATRICK A. MISSUD,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-05596-JCS 

ORDER RE CASE MANAGEMENT 

AND PRETRIAL ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a Request for Clarification Regarding Docket No. 25, Case Management 

and Pretrial Order (“Request”). The Court issued its Case Management and Pretrial Order (“CMC 

Order”) following a case management conference on March 11, 2016. In the CMC Order, the 

Court stated that “dispositive motions shall be filed on or before July 15, 2016, with the reply brief 

to be due four (4) weeks before the scheduled hearing date.” Apparently, Plaintiff is unclear as to 

when the hearing on dispositive motions is to be held. As the Court explained at the March 11, 

2016 case management conference, the parties’ summary judgment motions shall be filed (not 

heard) on July 15, 2016. The Court expressly stated at the case Management Conference that the 

motions should be noticed for hearing “seven weeks out” with the Reply briefs to be filed four 

weeks in advance of the hearing date. As Plaintiff has requested clarification, the Court sets the 

following dates:

Summary Judgment Motions filed: July 15, 2016

Oppositions to summary judgment motions filed: August 5, 2016

Reply on summary judgment motions filed: August 19, 2016

Hearing Date: To Be Determined by the Court at the completion of briefing

The Court notes that Plaintiff states in his that his availability to appear at the hearing on 

Case 3:15-cv-05596-JCS Document 27 Filed 06/27/16 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

the summary judgment motion(s) may be limited because he is currently in cancer treatment. 

Once the Court has set a specific hearing date, Plaintiff may request a continuance on that basis if 

necessary medical treatment prevents him from appearing at the hearing on that date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 27, 2016

______________________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

Chief Magistrate Judge

Case 3:15-cv-05596-JCS Document 27 Filed 06/27/16 Page 2 of 2