Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02198/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02198-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIANNE KNOX; WILLIAM L.

BLAYLOCK; ROBERT A. CONOVER;

EDWARD L. DOBROWOLSKI, JR;

KARYN GIL; THOMAS JACOB HASS;

PATRICK JOHNSON; JON JUMPER;

and R. PAUL RICKER, On Behalf

of Themselves and the Class

They Seek to Represent,

2:05-CV-2198-MCE-KJM

Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER

STEVE WESTLY, Controller,

State of California; and

CALIFORNIA STATE EMPLOYEES

ASSOCIATION, LOCAL 1000,

SERVICE EMPLOYEES

INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIOCLC,

Defendants.

----oo0oo----

In bringing the present Motion, Plaintiffs seek to continue

Defendant Service Employees International Union, Local 1000’s

Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the alternative, Summary

Adjudication set to be heard in this Court on October 30, 2006.

///

Case 2:05-cv-02198-MCE-CKD Document 79 Filed 10/12/06 Page 1 of 2
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 Because oral argument will not be of material assistance, 1

the Court orders this matter submitted on the briefs. E.D. Cal.

Local Rule 78-230(h). 

2

Plaintiffs request that this Motion be heard instead on

December 11, 2006. Defendant does not oppose Plaintiffs’ Motion 1

but requests several accommodations in return. Specifically,

Defendant requests that the briefing schedule set forth in this

Court’s Pretrial Scheduling Order (“PTSO”) be amended to allocate

each party an equal portion of the additional time resulting from

a continuance. In addition, Defendant seeks a limitation on

discovery during the pendency of the Motion for Summary Judgment.

Separately, Defendant seeks to have Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class

Certification currently set for hearing on October 16, 2006,

continued to December 11, 2006. Plaintiffs oppose Defendant’s

requests.

The Court orders Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment

continued from the October 30, 2006, hearing date to December 11,

2006. Further, the Court orders that Plaintiffs’ Motion for

Class Certification shall remain on calendar for October 16,

2006. Finally, all dates previously set forth in the PTSO

regarding filing, briefing and discovery deadlines are to remain

unchanged. The court affirms those dates at this time.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 12, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

Case 2:05-cv-02198-MCE-CKD Document 79 Filed 10/12/06 Page 2 of 2