Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04217/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04217-9/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARVIN JOHNSON,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN

FRANCISCO, et al.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C06-4217 MMC (BZ)

BRIEFING ORDER

On May 31, 2007, I held a telephonic conference to

discuss plaintiff’s May 24, 2007 motions to shorten time and

to extend time to complete discovery. All parties

participated through counsel. In light of the discussion on

the record, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 

1. Defendants having no opposition to plaintiff’s May

24, 2007 motion to shorten time, that motion is GRANTED;

2. The parties shall meet and confer in an effort to

resolve this dispute, having in mind the views expressed by

the court.

3. If they cannot resolve the dispute, defendants’

opposition shall be filed by June 8, 2007;

Case 3:06-cv-04217-MMC Document 59 Filed 05/31/07 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

4. Plaintiff’s reply, if any, shall be filed by June 12,

2007;

5. Defendants’ disclosures, pursuant to Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 26(a), shall be made by June 8, 2007. The

parties are reminded that a failure to voluntarily disclose

information pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)

or to supplement disclosures or discovery responses pursuant

to Rule 26(e) may result in exclusionary sanctions. 

6. If a hearing is necessary, the court will schedule

one.

Dated: May 31, 2007

 Bernard Zimmerman 

 United States Magistrate Judge

G:\BZALL\-REFS\Johnson v. SF\order.briefing.schedule.wpd

Case 3:06-cv-04217-MMC Document 59 Filed 05/31/07 Page 2 of 2