Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03020/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03020-3/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

Second Stipulation to Continue Settlement Conference 1

STEVEN M. WOODSIDE #58684

County Counsel

ANNE L. KECK #136315

Deputy County Counsel

County of Sonoma

575 Administration Dr., Rm. 105

Santa Rosa, California 95403-2815

Telephone: (707) 565-2421

Fax: (707) 565-2624

Attorneys for Defendant

 BILL COGBILL, in his official capacity of 

 Sheriff of the County of Sonoma

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAY HRDLICKA, an individual; CRIME,

JUSTICE & AMERICA, INC., a California

Corporation,

Plaintiffs,

v.

BILL COGBILL, in his official capacity of

Sheriff of the County of Sonoma.

Defendant.

No. C04-03020-MJJ

SECOND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE; ORDER

After the initial Settlement Conference was held before Magistrate Judge Edward M.

Chen in this matter on September 1, 2005, a second Settlement Conference was set to be held

on December 12, 2005. At the time of the initial Settlement Conference, the parties had filed

Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment, and the second conference was set to occur at a time

after a decision on such Motions could be rendered. The parties’ Cross-Motions for

Summary Judgment were ultimately heard by the regularly-assigned Court on October 4,

2005. 

Pursuant to the parties’ first stipulation and order of this Court, the second Settlement

Conference was continued to March 2, 2006, to await the decision on the parties’ CrossMotions for Summary Judgment. 

(EMC)

Case 3:04-cv-03020-MJJ Document 101 Filed 02/28/06 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

Second Stipulation to Continue Settlement Conference 2

As of the date of this stipulation, no decision has yet been issued on those Motions,

and there has been no change of status since the Court held the initial Settlement Conference. 

Accordingly, the parties request a second continuance of the upcoming Settlement

Conference for a period of 90 days to await a decision on their Cross-Motions for Summary

Judgment.

Respectfully submitted,

STEVEN M. WOODSIDE, County Counsel

Dated: February 22, 2006 By: s/Anne L. Keck 

Anne L. Keck

Deputy County Counsel

Attorneys for Defendant

FIRST AMENDMENT PROJECT

Dated: February 22, 2006 By: s/ David Greene 

James Wheaton

David Greene

Attorneys for Plaintiff

* * *

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the second Settlement Conference set in this matter

for March 2, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., is continued to_________________________, 2006, at

_________a.m./p.m. Further Settlement Conference Statements shall be lodged with Judge

Chen’s Chambers seven calendar days prior to the new Settlement Conference date.

Dated: _______________ 

Honorable Edward M. Chen

Magistrate Judge

June 1

9:30 February 28, 2006

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:04-cv-03020-MJJ Document 101 Filed 02/28/06 Page 2 of 2