Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05671/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05671-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:451 Employment Discrimination

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VICTOR GUERRERO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

AND REHABILITATION; STATE PERSONNEL

BOARD; and, in their official capacities, 

JEFFREY BEARD, Secretary of the California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation;

SUZANNE AMBROSE, Executive Officer of State

Personnel Board; K. CARROLL, Lieutenant; D.

SHARP, Sergeant; BARBARA LEASHORE,

Hearing Officer; C. HESTER, Lieutenant; V.

MAYOL, Lieutenant; S. COX, Lieutenant; V.

MYERS, Sergeant; JOHN (or JANE) DOES 1-100,

all of whose true names are unknown, 

Defendants. /

No. C 13-05671 WHA

ORDER ADVANCING HEARING

DATE, RE PAGE LIMITS, AND

REQUESTING RESPONSES

Now pending are four dueling motions for summary judgment. In light of the substantial

overlap, the reply briefs must not exceed TEN PAGES. Reply declarations are disfavored. 

The reply deadline is hereby advanced from April 2 to APRIL 1 AT NOON. The hearings on all

four motions are hereby advanced from April 16 to APRIL 14 AT 9:00 A.M. Please remember that

all existing deadlines remain in place despite the pending summary judgment motions. In other

words, all pretrial filings and disclosures must be made according to the deadlines stated in the

Guidelines for Trial and Final Pretrial Conference in Civil Jury Cases. 

Plaintiff preserved a jury demand for his first and second claims for relief. By APRIL 9 AT

NOON, please file a joint statement confirming (1) whether a jury trial is still requested and 

Case 3:13-cv-05671-WHA Document 130 Filed 03/13/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

(2) which issues and claims would be decided by the jury versus the judge. If a jury trial is

requested, please promptly meet-and-confer in a good faith effort to agree on as much language as

possible for proposed substantive jury instructions. It is generally unhelpful when each side puts

in dueling proposed jury instructions for every issue without reading the other side’s proposal and

without considering whether there are areas of agreement. By APRIL 13 AT NOON, the parties

shall please file a joint list of motions in limine and the expected length of the trial. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 13, 2015. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:13-cv-05671-WHA Document 130 Filed 03/13/15 Page 2 of 2