Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-02506/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-02506-41/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 18:1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

SFI-556316v1 

JONES DAY 

555 CALIFORNIA STREET, 26TH FLOOR • SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104 

TELEPHONE: (415) 626-3939 • FACSIMILE: (415) 875-5700 

Direct Number: (415) 875-5710

ramittelstaedt@jonesday.com 

ATLANTA • BEIJING • BRUSSELS • CHICAGO • CLEVELAND • COLUMBUS • DALLAS • FRANKFURT • HONG KONG • HOUSTON

IRVINE • LONDON • LOS ANGELES • MADRID • MENLO PARK • MILAN • MOSCOW • MUNICH • NEW DELHI • NEW YORK

PARIS • PITTSBURGH • SAN DIEGO • SAN FRANCISCO • SHANGHAI • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TAIPEI • TOKYO • WASHINGTON

JP005576:yb 

665326-605013 October 19, 2006 

VIA HAND DELIVERY

The Honorable Susan Illston 

United States District Judge 

United States District Court 

450 Golden Gate Avenue 

San Francisco, CA 94102 

Re: Bowoto v. ChevronTexaco Corp.: Case No. C-99-2506 SI

 REQUEST TO INCREASE PAGE LIMITS FOR BRIEF DUE 

 TOMORROW. 

Dear Judge Illston: 

Defendants’ motions re the remaining ATS claim—“crimes against humanity” or CAH—

are due tomorrow. By agreement, the motions will address both the substantive elements of 

CAH and the secondary liability issues. We think it is most efficient to include both points in the 

same motion rather than file two separate briefs. Accordingly, we requested that plaintiffs agree 

to enlarge the page limits for the single motion to 35 pages, and offered the same enlargement for 

their opposition. Based on past practice, we did not anticipate any objection from plaintiffs. But 

this time they flatly refused, without discussion. 

Civil Local Rule 7-4(b) requires prior court approval to exceed the page limit. 

Accordingly, we hereby request that the page limit for the opening brief and opposition brief be 

enlarged to 35 pages each, in addition to a statement of facts. Given the local rule, we ask that 

the approval be granted by tomorrow. We apologize for the late notice, which is the result of our 

mistaken assumption that plaintiffs would not object. 

Very truly yours, 

 /s/ 

Robert A. Mittelstaedt 

cc: Plaintiffs Counsel 

Case 3:99-cv-02506-SI Document 1244 Filed 10/19/2006 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Susan Illston

Case 3:99-cv-02506-SI Document 1249 Filed 10/20/06 Page 1 of 1