Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01792/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01792-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

)

1 MICHAEL D. BRUNO (SBN: 166805)

MBRUNO@GORDONREES.COM

2 HIEU TRAN (SBN: 280585)

HTRAN@GORDONREES.COM

3 GORDON & REES LLP

275 Battery Street, Suite 2000

4 San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: (415) 986-5900

5 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054

6 Attorneys for Defendant

JOHN MUIR HEALTH

7 (erroneously sued herein as “John Muir Medical Center”)

8

9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

12 MARLENE PEREZ, an individual, and ROSA ) 

CERISANO, an individual, )

13 )

)

14 Plaintiff, )

)

15

vs.

)

16 )

)

17 JOHN MUIR HEALTH, a California )

corporation, JOHN MUIR MEDICAL )

18 CENTER, an unknown business entity, and ) 

DOES 1-20, et al )

19 )

)

20 Defendants. )

)

21

CASE NO. 15-01792 HSG

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR 

ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE 

EXCESS PAGES FOR GOOD CAUSE

Trial Date: July 18, 2016

Hon. Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. 

Complaint Filed: April 21, 2015

22 TO THE HONORABLE COURT AND TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS

23 OF RECORD:

24 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Local Rule 7-11, Defendant John Muir Health

25 (“Defendant”), through its attorneys of record, hereby moves for Administrative Relief, after

26 having attempted to secure a stipulation from Plaintiffs Marlene Perez and Rosa Cerisano

27 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”). Defendant respectfully requests leave to file

28

1

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE EXCESS PAGES FOR GOOD 

CAUSE CASE NO. 15-01792 HSG

Case 4:15-cv-01792-HSG Document 65 Filed 03/29/16 Page 1 of 3
1

a single consolidated memorandum of law in support of its motion for summary judgment, or in

2

the alternative motion for summary adjudication, that exceeds the 25 page limit by five pages

3

based on the good cause set forth below:

4

Defendant’s deadline to file a dispositive motion is Thursday, March 31, 2016. Dkt. #51.

5

Northern District Local Rule 7-4(b) expressly limits briefs to 25 pages in length. Under

6

Local Rule 7-11, however, a party may move for miscellaneous administrative relief, including a

7

motion “to exceed otherwise applicable page limitations.”

8

This case involves two plaintiffs, who assert the following six causes of action:

9

retaliation, wrongful constructive discharge, and discrimination in violation of Title VII, the

10

ADA, California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), and California common law.

11

Dkt. No. 60. Plaintiffs contend that Defendant unlawfully retaliated against them because

12

Plaintiffs testified in a sexual harassment action brought by Plaintiffs’ former co-worker, Ms.

13

Charlotte Reed, against a JMH supervisor, Mr. Charles Griffin. Id. ¶ 1. Plaintiffs worked for

14

Defendant in two different departments, and premised their claims on various alleged adverse

15

employment actions, including but not limited to, a “heavy” workload of difficult assignments,

16

poor performance reviews over a three year period, unwarranted disciplinary actions, ignored

17

complaints, and constructive discharge. Dkt. No. 60. Plaintiffs claim that they endured unlawful

18

treatment from at least two different supervisors (Andrea Lovejoy and Shanda Dellner) and

19

Defendant’s management team (Sara Monahan and Michelle Lopes). Id.

20

Although Defendant endeavors to keep its consolidated memorandum of law in support

21

of its motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative motion for summary adjudication,

22

concise and to the point, Defendant requires five additional pages to adequately provide detailed

23

factual background necessary to for the court’s analysis. See Declaration of Hieu Tran in

24

Support of Defendant’s Motion for Administrative Relief [“Tran Decl.”] at ¶8.

25

On March 22, 2016, Defendant’s counsel contacted Plaintiffs’ counsel (via telephone and

26

email) proposing that the parties stipulate to a joint request for Defendant to exceed the 25 page

27

limit on a motion for summary judgment. See Exhibit A to Tran Decl. at ¶4. Defendant’s

28

2

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE EXCESS PAGES FOR GOOD 

CAUSE CASE NO. 15-01792 HSG

Case 4:15-cv-01792-HSG Document 65 Filed 03/29/16 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

proposal included a joint request for Plaintiffs to exceed the 25 page limit in opposition to 

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Id. Defendant prepared a proposed joint stipulation 

and included it in the email. Id. Plaintiffs did not respond. Tran Decl. at ¶5.

On March 24, 2016, Defendant’s counsel sent a follow up meet and confer email to

Plaintiffs’ counsel inquiring as to whether Plaintiffs would stipulate to a joint request to exceed

25 page limit. See Exhibit A to Tran Decl. at ¶6. Plaintiffs’ counsel did not respond to 

Defendant’s request for stipulation and instead requested to meet and confer over a discovery 

dispute the next day, Friday, March 25, 2016. Id.

To date, Defendant has not received a response from Plaintiff regarding its request for 

stipulation. Tran Decl. at ¶7.

Accordingly, Defendant respectfully requests an order permitting it to file a consolidated 

brief in support of its motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative motion for summary 

adjudication, in excess of 5 pages, thus changing the maximum length of the brief from 25 pages 

to 30 pages (exclusive of exhibits, attachments, declarations, table of contents, table of

authorities, and proof of service).

Dated: March 27, 2016 GORDON & REES LLP

17

18 By:

19

/S/ Hieu Tran 

MICHAEL D. BRUNO

HIEU TRAN

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 1099237/27401823v.1

Attorneys for Defendant

JOHN MUIR HEALTH

CORRECTED ORDER

Having considered the Defendant’s Motion for Administrative Relief to file a a 

consolidated brief in support of its motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative motion 

for summary adjudication, in excess of pages is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 3/29/2016

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

3

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE EXCESS PAGES FOR GOOD 

CAUSE CASE NO. 15-01792 HSG

Case 4:15-cv-01792-HSG Document 65 Filed 03/29/16 Page 3 of 3