Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01440/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01440-2/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

09-CV-2371 IEG (BGS)

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 FOR CONTINUANCE 

OF MOTION TO STAY HEARING 

DATE AND EXTEND ASSOCIATED 

DEADLINES 

AND 

ORDER THEREON

(Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A); Local Rules 

144, 230(f)) 

Case 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS Document 20 Filed 04/20/12 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 FOR CONTINUANCE OF MOTION TO STAY HEARING DATE

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 APlaintiffs@) and Defendants Attorney General 

Kamala D. Harris and Chief of the Firearms Bureau Stephen Lindley 

(collectively ADefendants@), through their respective attorneys of record, 

hereby jointly stipulate to continue the date of the hearing for Defendants=

Motion to Stay and to extend the remaining deadlines for moving papers 

related to that motion in accordance with the stipulated schedule set forth 

herein.

II.

RECITALS/GROUNDS FOR RELIEF

WHEREAS, Defendants filed a Motion to Stay Proceedings in this matter 

pending the Ninth Circuit en banc panel=s decision in Nordyke v. King, 664 

F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 2011), on March 22, 2012;

WHEREAS, in that motion, Defendants state they intend to file a motion 

for judgment on the pleadings but wish to see if the anticipated Nordyke

opinion affects their legal arguments in their motion; 

WHEREAS, based on the oral arguments that occurred on March 19, 

2012 in Nordyke, all parties to this action filed a joint stipulation on April 2, 

2012, asking this court to continue the hearing date on Defendants=s motion 

to stay, as well as all deadlines associated therewith, as follows:

1. The hearing on Defendants= Motion to Stay shall be moved to Monday, May 25, 2012.

2. Plaintiffs= Response to Defendants= Motion to Stay shall be due on or before April 23, 

2012.

3. Defendants Reply in support of their Motion shall be due on or before 

Case 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS Document 20 Filed 04/20/12 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 FOR CONTINUANCE OF MOTION TO STAY HEARING DATE

May 7, 2012.

WHEREAS, this Court issued an Order accepting the parties= proposed 

dates in their stipulation on January 11, 2012.

WHEREAS, since this Court=s acceptance of the parties= referenced 

stipulation, the en banc panel in Nordyke issued an order on April 4, 2012, 

deferring submission of the case for 45 days (i.e., May 19) and referring the 

parties to the Circuit Mediation Office for mediation in the hopes of settlement 

of the controversy Nordyke v. King, 2012 WL1110131 (April 4, 2012) (No. 

07-15763).

WHEREAS, all parties to this action seek to keep the costs of litigation 

low;

WHEREAS, all parties likewise wish to conserve judicial time and 

resources;

WHEREAS, all parties believe there is more benefit than burden to this 

Court and parties by awaiting the 45-day deference of Nordyke=s submission

to see if Defendants= Motion to Stay does not need to be litigated by a 

possible disposition of Nordyke at that time, all parties believe it is in the 

interest of judicial economy and conservation of the parties= resources to 

again continue the hearing date on Defendants= Motion to Stay and filing 

dates related thereto until after the 45-day deference of Nordyke=s 

submission; 

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

time for responding to complaints and certain other documents, but states 

that A[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, 

Awith or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, 

before the original time or its extension expires@;

Case 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS Document 20 Filed 04/20/12 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 FOR CONTINUANCE OF MOTION TO STAY HEARING DATE

AND WHEREAS, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND AGREE TO THE 

FOLLOWING:

4. The hearing on Defendants= Motion to Stay shall be moved to Friday, June 22, 2012.

5. Plaintiffs= Response to Defendants= Motion to Stay shall be due on or before June 8, 

2012.

6. Defendants Reply in support of their Motion shall be due on or before June 15, 2012.

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

Dated: April 20, 2012 MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

/s/ C. D. Michel 

C. D. Michel

Attorney for Plaintiffs

Dated: April 20, 2012 Deputy Attorney General

/s/ Susan K. Smith 

Susan K. Smith 

(as approved on 4/20/12)

 ORDERAttorney for Defendants

Good cause appearing, the Parties’ Stipulation is accepted and adopted as the Order of the 

Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 20, 2012 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

ci4d6

Case 1:11-cv-01440-LJO-MJS Document 20 Filed 04/20/12 Page 4 of 4