Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-02414/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-02414-9/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOSEPH HARDESTY and YVETTE 

HARDESTY, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR 

QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, 

et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:10-cv-2414-KJM-KJN 

JAY SCHNEIDER, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:12-cv-2457-KJM-KJN 

ORDER 

The plaintiffs and defendants in Case No. 10-2414, the Hardesty case, and Case 

No. 12-2457, the Schneider case, have each filed a joint status report and request to modify the 

scheduling order. See Defs.’ Rep., ECF No. 213; Pls.’ Rep., ECF No. 214. They request an order 

setting a schedule for the filing of a joint statement of undisputed facts and dispositive motions. 

Case 2:10-cv-02414-KJM-KJN Document 215 Filed 08/18/15 Page 1 of 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 

2

Defendant David Bieber, the sole remaining defendant in Schneider et al. v. County of 

Sacramento, et al., No. 12-2457, requests exemption from any consolidated briefing schedule, a 

request the court DENIES. 

Having considered the parties’ reports, the court orders as follows: 

(1) The parties shall compile a Statement of Undisputed Facts to be filed with the 

court no later than September 18, 2015, with no dispositive motions to be filed before this date; 

(2) Dispositive motions shall be filed no later than October 16, 2015; 

(3) Oppositions shall be filed no later than December 4, 2015; 

(4) Replies shall be filed no later than December 30, 2015; 

(5) The court anticipates a combined hearing in January 2016; and 

(6) Defendants O’Bryant, Norris, Testa, and Taras may file a consolidated motion 

for summary judgment supported by a memorandum of point and authorities of up to sixty-five 

pages; the consolidated brief in opposition may likewise not exceed sixty-five pages, and the 

consolidated reply shall not exceed thirty-two pages. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: August 18, 2015. 

Case 2:10-cv-02414-KJM-KJN Document 215 Filed 08/18/15 Page 2 of 2