Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-04336/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-04336-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 950
Nature of Suit: Constitutionality of State Statutes
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAFAYETTE S JAMERSON et al,

Plaintiffs,

v

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

et al,

Defendants.

 /

No C-01-4336 VRW

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Pursuant to the court’s order following the February 8,

2005, case management conference, Doc #31 (minutes), defendant City

and County of San Francisco (CCSF) has filed a motion for summary

judgment, Doc #33, noticed for hearing on May 26, 2005. Pursuant

to Civ L R 7-3(a), plaintiffs were to file their oppositions not

later than May 5, 2005. Plaintiffs have not filed oppositions. 

Accordingly, plaintiffs -- individually, as they proceed pro sese 

-- are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing not later than May 19,

/

/

Case 3:01-cv-04336-VRW Document 35 Filed 05/09/05 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

2005, why CCSF’s motion for summary judgment should not be treated

as unopposed. The hearing set for May 26, 2005, is VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge

Case 3:01-cv-04336-VRW Document 35 Filed 05/09/05 Page 2 of 2