Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00363/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00363-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other 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

 

 JOINT STIPULATION & ORDER TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

LORI RIFKIN – 244081 

RIFKIN LAW OFFICE 

P.O Box 19169 

Oakland, California 94619 

Telephone: (415) 685-3591 

Facsimile: (510) 255-6266 

Email: lrifkin@rifkinlawoffice.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

Nathaniel Smith, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

City of Stockton; Officer Mayer, Officer 

Robin Harrison, Officer Michael Perez, 

and former Chief of Police Blair Ulring, in 

their individual capacities; and Chief of 

Police Eric Jones, in his official capacity, 

Defendants. 

 Case No. 2:15-cv-00363-KJM-AC 

JOINT STIPULATION & ORDER TO 

FILE SECOND AMENDED 

COMPLAINT 

Case 2:15-cv-00363-KJM-AC Document 37 Filed 06/23/16 Page 1 of 3
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

 

 JOINT STIPULATION & ORDER TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

1

Plaintiff Nathaniel Smith (“Plaintiff) and Defendants City of Stockton, Officers 

Mayer, Harrison, and Perez, and Chief of Police Jones, (“Defendants”), by and through 

their respective counsel, hereby STIPULATE and AGREE as follows: 

WHEREAS, on February 12, 2015, Plaintiff filed his Complaint (Doc. No. 1) 

against Defendants in the United States District Court, Eastern District of California; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiff served his Complaint on all Defendants; 

WHEREAS, on October 25, 2015, Plaintiffs filed his First Amended Complaint 

(Doc. No. 30), which is the current operative Complaint; 

WHEREAS, Plaintiff has determined that he wishes to dismiss, with prejudice, his 

third claim for relief against Defendants City of Stockton and Jones alleging discrimination 

on the basis of disability; 

THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE that Plaintiff is permitted to file a Second 

Amended Complaint, which is attached as Exhibit A to this Stipulation. This Second 

Amended Complaint includes only Plaintiff’s First Claim for Relief for excessive force 

and Second Claim for Relief for intentionally or recklessly provoking a confrontation. 

The parties further stipulate that all answers and/or motions to dismiss already filed as to 

Plaintiff’s original Complaint and First Amended Complaint shall be deemed responsive to 

Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, and that no Defendants shall file an additional 

Answer. 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

Case 2:15-cv-00363-KJM-AC Document 37 Filed 06/23/16 Page 2 of 3
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

 

 JOINT STIPULATION & ORDER TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

2

DATED: June 21, 2016 Respectfully submitted, 

RIFKIN LAW OFFICE 

 By: /s/ Lori Rifkin 

 Lori Rifkin 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

DATED: June 21, 2016 

 By: /s/ Ted Wood 

 Ted Wood 

Deputy City Attorney 

 Attorney for Defendants 

The Court, having considered the Parties’ Stipulation to file the Second Amended 

Complaint, and good cause appearing, the Second Amended Complaint, filed with the 

parties’ Stipulation as Exhibit A, shall be filed within three days of this Order by Plaintiff’s 

counsel as a separate docket entry in this action. All answers and/or motions to dismiss 

already filed are hereby deemed responsive to the Second Amended Complaint as the 

operative complaint. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: June 22, 2016 

Case 2:15-cv-00363-KJM-AC Document 37 Filed 06/23/16 Page 3 of 3