Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-03877/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-03877-2/pdf.json

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

---

- 1 - 

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— 

Stbu18024\ stip-extend3.doc Case No. C05-3877 RS 

Further Stipulation to Extend Time to 

Respond to Complaint 

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

Dennis Howell, Esq. SBN 78806 

Rebecca Connolly, Esq. SBN 145482 

GRUNSKY, EBEY, FARRAR & HOWELL 

A Professional Corporation 

240 Westgate Drive 

Watsonville, CA 95076 

Telephone: (831)722-2444 

Facsimile: (831)722-6153 

dennis.howell@grunskylaw.com 

rebecca.connolly@grunskylaw.com 

Attorneys for Defendant Starbucks 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT 

SAN JOSE 

ESTATE OF ZIAM BOJCIC, AJNIJA 

BOJCIC, NURKO BADETA, NURKO 

MITHAT, NURKO ANZDA, NURKO 

AMELA, TUCAKOVIC LARIFA, 

TUCAKOVIC SMAZL, BELMA 

PREJLOBAC SEJAD. 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

CITY OF SAN JOSE, SAN JOSE POLICE 

DEPARTMENT, OFFICER DONALD 

GUESS, individually and in his official 

capacity, STARBUCKS, MANAGER 

STARBUCKS, individually and in her official 

capacity. 

 Defendants. 

 

 The undersigned parties hereby stipulate that all served defendants shall have until April 20, 

2006, to answer or otherwise respond to the above-captioned complaint. Plaintiffs’ counsel has 

represented that prior to such date, but in no event later than April 12, 2006, he or substituted counsel 

will be filing an Amended Complaint. If no amended complaint is filed by April 12, 2006, defendants 

plan on filing their responsive pleading on or before April 20, 2006. 

Case No: C05-3877 RS

FURTHER STIPULATION TO EXTEND 

TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 

AND ORDER THEREON

*E-FILED 3/29/06*

Case 5:05-cv-03877-RS Document 16 Filed 03/29/06 Page 1 of 3
- 2 - 

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— 

Stbu18024\ stip-extend3.doc Case No. C05-3877 RS 

Further Stipulation to Extend Time to 

Respond to Complaint 

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

 IT IS SO STIPULATED: 

DATED: 3/28/06 

 

By /s/ 

 Kevin R. McLean, Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DATED: 3/28/06 

 

By /s/ 

 Clifford Greenberg, Attorneys for Defendants 

City Of San Jose, San Jose Police Department, 

And Officer Guess 

DATED: 3/28/06 GRUNSKY, EBEY, FARRAR & HOWELL 

 

By /s/ 

 Rebecca Connolly, Attorneys for Defendant 

Starbucks 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendants shall have 

until April 20, 2006 to file their responsive pleading. 

DATED: ____________________ _______________________________________ 

 Richard Seeborg 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

3/29/06

Case 5:05-cv-03877-RS Document 16 Filed 03/29/06 Page 2 of 3
- 3 - 

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— 

Stbu18024\ stip-extend3.doc Case No. C05-3877 RS 

Further Stipulation to Extend Time to 

Respond to Complaint 

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

General Rule 45 Attestation 

I, Rebecca Connolly, hereby declare that I have the concurrence of the above-named 

signatories to file this document electronically. 

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is 

true and correct. 

 Executed this 28th, day of March 2006, at Watsonville, California. 

 /s/ 

 Rebecca Connolly 

Case 5:05-cv-03877-RS Document 16 Filed 03/29/06 Page 3 of 3