Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03889/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-03889-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

Amended Administrative Motion to Continue Trial 

CASE NO. C09-03889 CRB

1 n:\lit\li2010\090175\00636412.doc

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 

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669

City Attorney 

JOANNE HOEPER, State Bar #114961

Chief Trial Deputy 

BLAKE P. LOEBS, State Bar #145790

Chief of Civil Rights Litigation 

Fox Plaza 

1390 Market Street, 6th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94102-5408 

Telephone: (415) 554-3868 

Facsimile: (415) 554-3837 

E-Mail: blake.loebs@sfgov.org 

Attorneys for Defendants 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TERESA SHEEHAN, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, a municipal corporation; 

HEATHER FONG, in her capacity as Chief of 

Police for the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO; KIMBERLY REYNOLDS, 

individually, and in her capacity as a police 

officer for the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO; KATHERINE HOLDER, 

individually and in her capacity as a police 

officer for the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO; and, San Francisco police 

officers DOES 1-25, inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. C09-03889 CRB 

AMENDED JOINT ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND 

MODIFY PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE ORDER

No hearing date set pursuant to Local Rule 7-11 

Trial Date: November 29, 2010 

INTRODUCTION 

This motion amends the administrative motion filed yesterday which contained erroneous dates 

for the closure of fact discovery and expert disclosure. All parties to this action are jointly requesting 

that the trial date of this matter be continued from November 29, 2010 to April 25, 2011 to allow for, 

Case 3:09-cv-03889-CRB Document 23 Filed 06/29/10 Page 1 of 4
Amended Administrative Motion to Continue Trial 

CASE NO. C09-03889 CRB

2 n:\lit\li2010\090175\00636412.doc

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 

among other things, the paternity leave of Defendants' attorney, Blake Loebs, which will expire on 

February 11, 2011. The parties have previously made a motion to continue this matter to June 2011, 

which was denied. In denying the motion, the Court, however, informed Defendants that it would 

entertain a more modest request. After extensive meeting and conferring and successfully continuing 

the trial of another matter to allow room for this trial, the parties respectfully request that the trial of 

this matter be continued to April 25, 2011. 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY/REQUEST 

On or about May17, 2010, all parties in this matter jointly requested that the trial date be 

moved from November 29, 2010 to June 2011. We made this request for a variety of reasons, which 

included the fact that the trial had been set to occur within six months of the initial CMC, the parties 

have not been able to conduct the extensive discovery necessary to prepare this case for trial and that 

Defendants' attorney is expecting his first child in October and will be out on paternity leave until 

February 11, 2010.1

 (Loeb Decl. ¶2.) 

On May 2, 2010, at a CMC on a different matter, the Court informed Defendants that it was 

going to deny the request to continue the trial in Sheehan because the parties were asking for too much 

additional time, but that because of Defendants attorney's paternity leave it would entertain a more 

modest request. Shortly after the May 2, 2010 CMC, the Court formally denied the parties' request to 

continue the trial to June 2010. (Loebs Decl. ¶3.) 

At the Court's invitation, both parties are now jointly requesting that the trial date be moved to 

April 25, 2011. It has been exceptionally difficult for the parties to find any time before June in which 

Plaintiff's counsel could try this case because of his busy trial calendar. After extensive meeting and 

conferring and with the cooperation of the attorney in another matter, Plaintiff's counsel recently 

persuade a federal judge in a different matter to move a trial that had been previously scheduled for 

April 25, 2011 to accommodate a continuance in this matter. (Nisenbaum Decl. ¶2; Loebs Decl. ¶4.) 

 1

 The City and County of San Francisco has a three month paternity leave policy. Mr. Loebs, 

however, is in the process of determining whether he will be able take a fourth month. If successful, 

his leave would expire February 11, 2010. (Loebs Decl. ¶2.) 

Case 3:09-cv-03889-CRB Document 23 Filed 06/29/10 Page 2 of 4
Amended Administrative Motion to Continue Trial 

CASE NO. C09-03889 CRB

3 n:\lit\li2010\090175\00636412.doc

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 

The parties also propose the following pre-trial schedule: 

Close of Fact Discovery: October 8, 2010 

Expert Disclosure: December 19, 2010 

Deadline to Notice Dispositive Motion: January 20, 2011 

Deadline for Hearing Dispositive Motions: February 25, 2011 

Rebuttal Expert Disclosure: January 20, 2011 

Close of Expert Discovery: February 18, 2011 

Pretrial conference: March 25, 2011 

Trial: April, 25, 2011 

Dated: June 24, 2010 

DENNIS J. HERRERA 

City Attorney 

JOANNE HOEPER 

Chief Trial Deputy 

BLAKE P. LOEBS 

Chief of Civil Rights Litigation 

By: /s/ Blake P. Loebs 

BLAKE P. LOEBS 

Attorneys for Defendants 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

Dated: June 24, 2010 

LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS 

By: /s/ Benjamin Nisenbaum 

BENJAMIN NISENBAUM 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

TERESA SHEEHAN 

Pursuant to General Order 45, §X.B., the filer of this 

document attests that he has received the concurrence of 

this signatory to file this document. 

Case 3:09-cv-03889-CRB Document 23 Filed 06/29/10 Page 3 of 4
Amended Administrative Motion to Continue Trial 

CASE NO. C09-03889 CRB

4 n:\lit\li2010\090175\00636412.doc

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 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the parties' joint administrative motion, the Court finds good cause to modify its 

Pre-Trial Conference Order. All dates in this action previously set are hereby vacated. The Court 

orders the following deadlines and trial date in this action: 

Close of Fact: October 8, 2010 

Expert Disclosure: December 19, 2010 

Deadline to Notice Dispositive Motion: January 20, 2011 

Deadline for Hearing Dispositive Motions: February 25, 2011 

Rebuttal Expert Disclosure: January 20, 2011 

Close of Expert Discovery: February 18, 2011 

Pretrial conference: March 25, 2011 

Trial: April, 25, 2011 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

 

THE HONORABLE CHARLES R. BREYER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

June 25, 2010

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:09-cv-03889-CRB Document 23 Filed 06/29/10 Page 4 of 4