Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-01802/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-01802-0/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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT 

SF/21644102.1 

BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP 

FRANK KENNAMER (SBN 157844) 

NEHA NISSEN (SBN 190848) 

TROY SAURO (SBN 224097) 

RACHEL H. SOMMOVILLA (SBN 231529) 

Three Embarcadero Center 

San Francisco, California 94111-4067 

Telephone: 415.393.2000 

Facsimile: 415.393.2286 

Attorneys for WAMM Plaintiffs 

GERALD UELMEN (SBN 39909) 

Santa Clara University School of Law 

500 El Camino Real 

Santa Clara, California 95053 

Telephone: 408.554.5729 

Facsimile: 408.554.4426 

Attorney for County of Santa Cruz 

and WAMM Plaintiffs 

Additional Counsel Listed on Signature Page 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA; 

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA; 

VALERIE CORRAL; ELADIO V. ACOSTA; 

JAMES DANIEL BAEHR; MICHAEL 

CHESLOSKY; JENNIFER LEE HENTZ; 

DOROTHY GIBBS; HAROLD F. MARGOLIN; 

and WO/MEN’S ALLIANCE FOR MEDICAL 

MARIJUANA 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

ALBERTO GONZALES, Attorney General of 

the United States; KAREN P. TANDY, 

Administrator of the Drug Enforcement 

Administration; JOHN P. WALTERS, Director of 

the Office of National Drug Control Policy; and 

30 UNKNOWN DRUG ENFORCEMENT 

ADMINISTRATION AGENTS, 

Defendants. 

Case No.: 03-CV-1802 JF 

STIPULATION AND

ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO 

FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT 

No hearing requested 

Complaint Filed: April 23, 2003 

Judge: Hon. Jeremy Fogel

Case 5:03-cv-01802-JF Document 128 Filed 11/30/05 Page 1 of 4
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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT

1 

SF/21644102.1 

Plaintiffs and Defendants, through their counsel of record, stipulate as follows: 

1. On April 21, 2004, this Court issued an Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion 

for Reconsideration, granting Plaintiffs leave to amend the complaint within 90 days. (Docket 

No. 96). 

2. On May 10, 2004, this Court stayed this action “pending the outcome of 

the Government’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court in Raich v. 

Ashcroft, Ninth Cir. Case No. 03-15481, the Ninth Circuit’s decision in the Related Case of 

Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana, et al., v. United States, Ninth Cir. Case No. 03-

15062, and any subsequent petitions and or appeals in those cases.” (Docket No. 104) 

3. On September 20, 2005, the Ninth Circuit reversed this Court’s grant of a 

preliminary injunction in the above-captioned case, granting the Appellants’ unopposed motion 

for summary disposition. 

4. Plaintiffs currently must file an amended complaint on or before 

November 30, 2004.1

5. Since the filing of the original Complaint over two years ago, facts and 

circumstances relevant to this action have changed, including the deaths of two of the named 

member-plaintiffs. Plaintiffs’ counsel have been interviewing members and gathering 

information necessary to amend the Complaint. Due to the length in time since the original 

Complaint was filed, Plaintiffs’ counsel anticipates that additional time is needed to complete its 

fact gathering and amendments to Plaintiffs’ Complaint. 

6. Plaintiffs hereby request that the Court enter an Order extending Plaintiffs’ 

time to file an amended complaint to January 30, 2006. Defendants do not oppose Plaintiffs’ 

request. 

 

1

 19 of Plaintiffs’ 90 days to file an amended complaint elapsed from April 21 through May 10, 

2004. November 30, 2005 is 71 days from September 20, 2005, the date the stay imposed by the 

Court’s May 10, 2004 Order was lifted. 

Case 5:03-cv-01802-JF Document 128 Filed 11/30/05 Page 2 of 4
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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT

2 

SF/21644102.1 

DATED: November 22, 2005 BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP 

By: /s/ 

Frank Kennamer 

Attorneys for WAMM Plaintiffs 

DATED: November 22, 2005 

By: /s/ 

Gerald Uelmen 

Attorneys for County of Santa Cruz and WAMM 

Plaintiffs 

DATED: November 22, 2005 ATCHISON, BARISONE & CONDOTTI 

By: /s/ 

John Barisone 

Attorneys for City of Santa Cruz 

Benjamin Rice (SBN 98551) 

331 Soquel Avenue, Suite 203 

Santa Cruz, California 95062 

Telephone: 831.425.0555 

Facsimile: 831.459.9815 

Attorney for County of Santa Cruz 

and WAMM Plaintiffs 

John Barisone (SBN 87831) 

333 Church Street 

Santa Cruz, California 95060 

Telephone: 831.423.8383 

Facsimile: 831.423.9401 

Attorney for City of Santa Cruz, California 

Case 5:03-cv-01802-JF Document 128 Filed 11/30/05 Page 3 of 4
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 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT

3 

SF/21644102.1 

Graham Boyd (SBN 167727) 

Allen Hopper (SBN 181678) 

ACLU Drug Law Reform Project 

1101 Pacific Avenue, Suite 333 

Santa Cruz, CA 95060 

Attorneys for WAMM 

DATED: November 16, 2005 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE 

By: /s/ 

Mark T. Quinlivan 

Attorneys for Defendants 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: Nov. 28, 2005 

Hon. Jeremy Fogel 

U.S. District Court Judge 

s/electronic signature authorized

Case 5:03-cv-01802-JF Document 128 Filed 11/30/05 Page 4 of 4