Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02176/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-02176-5/pdf.json

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

---

-1-

MOTION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER RE FILING OF ANSWER BY DEFENDANT J. ABRAO

Gray v. County of Sonoma, et al., Case No: 3:15-cv-02176 WHA

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

ALISON BERRY WILKINSON (SBN 135890)

Berry | Wilkinson | Law Group

4040 Civic Center Dr., Suite 200

San Rafael, California 

Telephone: (415) 259.6638

Facsimile: (877) 259.3762

Email: alison@berrywilkinson.com

Attorneys for Defendant

DEPUTY J. ABRAO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHARMAINE GRAY,

Plaintiff,

vs.

COUNTY OF SONOMA; DEPUTY J. 

ABROA, individually and in his official 

capacity; SHERIFF STEVE FREITAS; 

ASSISTANT SHERIFF RANDALL 

WALKER; DOES 1 through 20, inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:15-cv-02176 WHA

MOTION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 

6.1 REQUESTING A FURTHER 

EXTENSION OF TIME FOR 

DEFENDANT J. ABRAO TO FILE AN 

ANSWER; DECLARATION OF ALISON 

BERRY WILKINSON IN SUPPORT; and 

(PROPOSED) ORDER

Pursuant to Local Rule 6.1(b), Defendant DEPUTY J. ABRAO hereby submits this application 

to extend time for him to answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint. This application is 

necessary in order to provide sufficient time for his newly substituted attorney to evaluate the action 

before submitting any responsive pleading. 

On June 24, 2015, counsel for Defendant COUNTY OF SONOMA and all individual 

defendants requested jointly that this Court approve an order extending time for all Defendants to 

answer the Amended Complaint (ECF Docket No. 12). On June 29, 2015 this Court granted all

defendants up to and including July 17, 2015 to file an answer to the amended complaint (ECF Docket 

No. 13). Subsequent to the issuance of the the order extending time (ECF Docket No. 13) Defendant 

COUNTY OF SOMONA determined that Defendant DEPUTY J. ABRAO should be represented by 

Case 3:15-cv-02176-WHA Document 18 Filed 07/21/15 Page 1 of 3
-2-

MOTION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER RE FILING OF ANSWER BY DEFENDANT J. ABRAO

Gray v. County of Sonoma, et al., Case No: 3:15-cv-02176 WHA

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

independent counsel, necessitating this motion to extend time in order to ensure that newly substituted 

counsel has an adequate opportunity to fully evaluate the case prior to filing a responsive pleading on 

behalf of Defendant J. ABRAO. 

Dated: July 20, 2015 Respectfully submitted,

Berry | Wilkinson | Law Group

By /s/ Alison Berry Wilkinson

ALISON BERRY WILKINSON

Attorneys for Defendant DEPUTY J. ABRAO

DECLARATION OF ALISON BERRY WILKINSON IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

I, Alison Berry Wilkinson, declare as follows:

1. I am an attorney at law licensed to practice before all courts in the State of California. I 

make this declaration based on my personal knowledge and, if called to testify, could and would testify 

competently to the matters contained herein.

2. It was determined by Defendant COUNTY OF SONOMA that Defendant DEPUTY J. 

ABRAO should have separate independent counsel in this matter. Steps were thereafter taken to obtain 

approval of my appointment as independent counsel.

3. Last week, I contacted counsel for Plaintiff CHARMAINE GRAY and advised her that 

this office would be filing a substitution of attorneys on behalf of Defendant DEPUTY J. ABRAO. I 

further sought her agreement to extend time for the filing of a responsive pleading from the scheduled 

date of July 17, 2015. 

4. Plaintiff's counsel was on vacation at the time of my inquiry, and indicated by email that 

she was agreeable to a reasonable extension of time given the substitution of attorneys. Unfortunately, 

due to her being on vacation, a stipulation and proposed order was attempted, but not completed. 

Rather than wait for her return, which would only further delay the filing of a responsive pleading, I 

make this Motion.

5. In order to fully and adequately represent the interests of my new client, due diligence 

requires that I investigate and evaluate the underlying facts and pleadings developed to date before 

Case 3:15-cv-02176-WHA Document 18 Filed 07/21/15 Page 2 of 3
-3-

MOTION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER RE FILING OF ANSWER BY DEFENDANT J. ABRAO

Gray v. County of Sonoma, et al., Case No: 3:15-cv-02176 WHA

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

filing a responsive pleadings. I believe that I can accomplish those necessary tasks efficiently and 

expeditiously, and so therefore only seek an additional two week extension of time, up to and including 

August 7, 2015 for the filing of an Answer or other responsive pleading.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 20th day 

of July 2015, in San Rafael, California.

/s/ Alison Berry Wilkinson

ALISON BERRY WILKINSON

Attorneys for Defendant DEPUTY J. ABRAO

ORDER

Good cause having been shown, Defendant DEPUTY J. ABRAO shall have up to and including 

August 7, 2015 to file an answer to the amended complaint. All other dates remain as scheduled.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _________________________

_________________________________________

Honorable Judge William Alsup

United States District Court

July 21, 2015.

Case 3:15-cv-02176-WHA Document 18 Filed 07/21/15 Page 3 of 3