Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04196/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04196-20/pdf.json

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

---

Proposed Order on Ex-parte Application 

Pollar v. County of Alameda, et al. 

(Case No. 08-04196 BZ)

1

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

ROBERT R. POWELL, ESQ. CSB#159747 

DENNIS R. INGOLS, ESQ. CSB#236458 

LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT R. POWELL

925 West Hedding Street 

San José, California 95126 

T: 408-553-0200 F: 408-553-0203 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DANIELLE POLLAR, SHALAWN POLLAR 

as Guardian Ad Litem for J.A., a minor 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

(San Francisco Division) 

DANIELLE POLLAR, SHALAWN ) Case No. 08-04196 BZ 

POLLAR as Guardian Ad Litem for J.A., ) 

a minor, ) [Proposed] 

 Plaintiffs, ) ORDER OF THE COURT ON 

 ) EX-PARTE APPLICATION 

vs. ) ORDER GRANTING INCREASED 

 ) PAGE LIMIT FOR PLAINTIFFS’ 

 ) OPPOSITION TO CITY 

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, ) DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR 

 ) SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

Defendants. ) 

 ) 

_____ ) 

Plaintiffs’ Ex-parte Application for Order Granting Increased Page Limit for Plaintiffs’ 

Opposition to City Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, was submitted February 8, 

2010 by e-file and chambers submission by e-mail through the ECF system. 

Upon review of the Application, the Declaration of Counsel [In Support], and the 

review of any opposition pleadings submitted, if any, the court hereby finds and orders as 

// 

Case 3:08-cv-04196-BZ Document 82 Filed 02/09/10 Page 1 of 2
Proposed Order on Ex-parte Application 

Pollar v. County of Alameda, et al. 

(Case No. 08-04196 BZ)

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

follows: 

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, 

1. Plaintiffs may file a brief up to 28 pages in Opposition to the City Defendants’ Motion 

for Summary Judgment which is filed and currently pending. 

2. City Defendants may file a Reply brief up to 3 pages longer than the default limit as 

provided for by the Local Rules. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: 2/____/2010 _________________________ 

 JUDGE BERNARD ZIMMERMAN 

U.S.D.C. NORTHERN DISTRICT 

CALIFORNIA – San Francisco 

8

Case 3:08-cv-04196-BZ Document 82 Filed 02/09/10 Page 2 of 2