Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01440/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01440-0/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

1

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PLEADING DEADLINES AND ORDER

C. D. Michel - S.B.N. 144258

Sean A. Brady - S.B.N. 262007

MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

180 E. Ocean Boulevard, Suite 200

Long Beach, CA 90802 

Telephone: 562-216-4444

Facsimile: 562-216-4445

Email: cmichel@michellawyers.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO BRANCH COURTHOUSE

BARRY BAUER, STEPHEN

WARKENTIN, NICOLE FERRY,

LELAND ADLEY, JEFFREY

HACKER, NATIONAL RIFLE

ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA,

INC., CALIFORNIA RIFLE AND

PISTOL ASSOCIATION

FOUNDATION, HERB BAUER

SPORTING GOODS, INC.,

Plaintiffs

vs.

KAMALA HARRIS, in Her Official

Capacity as Attorney General For the

State of California; STEPHEN

LINDLEY, in His Official Capacity

as Acting Chief for the California

Department of Justice, and DOES 1-

10,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS

STIPULATION TO EXTEND

PLEADING DEADLINES AND

ORDER

(Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), 15(a)(1)(B);

Local Rules 143-144) 

Case 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS Document 10 Filed 01/11/12 Page 1 of 4
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

2

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PLEADING DEADLINES AND ORDER

I.

INTRODUCTION

The parties, Plaintiffs Barry Bauer, Stephen Warkentin, Nicole Ferry, Leland

Adley, Jeffrey Hacker, National Rifle Association of America, Inc., California

Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation, Herb Bauer Sporting Goods, Inc.

(collectively “Plaintiffs”) and Defendants Kamala Harris and Stephen Lindley

(collectively “Defendants”), through their respective attorneys of record, hereby

jointly stipulate to extend the deadline for Defendants’ submission of a responsive

pleading in this matter, and request an order from the Court for an extension of

Plaintiffs’ deadline to file a First Amended Complaint in accordance with the

stipulated schedule set forth herein.

II.

RECITALS/GROUNDS FOR RELIEF

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their initial Complaint in this matter on August

25, 2011;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs effected service upon Defendants on December 22,

2011 because they were awaiting resolution of California Senate Bill 819 (Leno,

2011-2012) (“SB 819”), due to its potential to impact Plaintiffs’ claims;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs intend to file an Amended Complaint in this matter due

to the passage of SB 819;

WHEREAS, Defendants’ Answer to the initial Complaint in this matter or

other responsive pleading must be filed on or before January 12, 2012;

WHEREAS, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) 15(a), Plaintiffs

are required to file their Amended Complaint by January 12, 2012 – the same day

by which Defendants’ Answer or other responsive pleading to the initial Complaint

is due – or, Plaintiffs must wait until 21 days after service of Defendants’ response

to the initial Complaint in this matter to file their Amended Complaint unless

Case 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS Document 10 Filed 01/11/12 Page 2 of 4
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

3

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PLEADING DEADLINES AND ORDER

written consent of the opposing party or the Court is obtained; 

WHEREAS, Local Rule 144(a) of this Court allows a 28-day extension of

time for responding to complaints and certain other documents, and all parties

agree that Defendants should be allowed this extension;

WHEREAS, Local Rule 144(a) also provides that “[a]ll other extensions of

time must be approved by the Court;”

WHEREAS, FRCP 6(b)(1)(A) allows for the extension of time for good cause, 

“with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before

the original time or its extension expires;”

WHEREAS, neither party has obtained an extension of time relating to any

matter for which this extension is sought;

WHEREAS, both parties to this action seek to conserve judicial resources and

time by attempting to avoid the need for this court to consider future amendments

to pleadings;

WHEREAS, both parties to this action likewise seek to keep the costs of

litigation low;

AND WHEREAS, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND AGREE TO THE

FOLLOWING:

1. Defendants shall be allowed a 28-day extension of time to file their Answer

or other responsive pleading in accordance with Local Rule 144(a) whether to

Plaintiffs’ Complaint or Amended Complaint.

2. Plaintiffs shall file their Amended Complaint on or before Thursday,

February 9, 2012, or as the court otherwise deems convenient.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS Document 10 Filed 01/11/12 Page 3 of 4
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

4

STIPULATION TO EXTEND PLEADING DEADLINES AND ORDER

3. Defendants shall file their Answer or other responsive pleading to

Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint within 28 days of it being filed, or as the court

otherwise deems convenient.

The parties hereby jointly request that this Court grant the relief sought by this

stipulation.

Dated: January 10, 2012 MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

/s/ C. D. Michel 

C. D. Michel

Attorney for Plaintiffs

Dated: January 10, 2012 Deputy Attorney General

/s/Kimberly Granger 

(as approved on 1/10/12)

Attorney for Defendants

ORDER

The stipulation of the parties is approved.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 11, 2012 /s/Michael J. Seng 

ci4d6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS Document 10 Filed 01/11/12 Page 4 of 4