Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02262/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02262-10/pdf.json

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

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FREDERICK SCHIFF,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

et al.,

Defendants. ___________________________________

NARDA GILLESPIE et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

et al.,

Defendants. ___________________________________

MARK OSUNA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C-03-4345 MMC

No. C-04-2261 MMC

No. C-04-2262 MMC

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 

SCHIFF AND MANSHARDT

DECLARATIONS SHOULD NOT BE

STRICKEN/DISREGARDED

Case 3:04-cv-02262-MMC Document 120 Filed 01/11/06 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

2

Before the Court are four separate motions for summary judgment, noticed for

hearing January 13, 2006, and plaintiffs’ oppositions thereto.

Defendants Fred Lau (“Lau”) and the City and County of San Francisco (“City”)

correctly note that part of the evidence on which plaintiffs rely has not been properly

submitted to the Court. In particular, Lau objects to the Schiff Declaration, attached to

plaintiffs’ joint opposition to Lau’s motion for summary judgment, on the ground it is not

signed; the City objects to the Declaration of Frederick Manshardt, cited in plaintiffs’ joint

opposition to the City’s motion for summary judgment, on the ground said declaration was

neither filed with the Court nor served on the City.

Accordingly, plaintiffs are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing, no later

than January 12, 2005 at 4:00 p.m., why the entirety of such declarations should not be

stricken and/or disregarded by the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 11, 2006 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:04-cv-02262-MMC Document 120 Filed 01/11/06 Page 2 of 2