Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00792/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00792-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

Defendants did not provide the Court with a chambers copy of their motion or

application. The Court, nonetheless, has considered the filings. For future reference,

defendants are reminded of the following provision in the Court’s Standing Orders: “In all

cases that have been assigned to the Electronic Case Filing Program, the parties are

required to provide for use in chambers one paper copy of each document that is filed

electronically. The paper copy of each such document shall be delivered no later than

noon on the day after the document is filed electronically. The paper copy shall be marked

‘Chambers Copy’ and shall be delivered to the Clerk’s Office in an envelope clearly marked

with the judge’s name, case number, and ‘E-Filing Chambers Copy.’” Defendants are

hereby advised that if they fail in the future to comply with the Court’s Standing Order to

provide chambers copies of electronically-filed documents, the Court may impose

sanctions, including, but not limited to, striking from the record any electronically-filed

document of which a chambers copy has not been timely provided to the Court.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD HOMEM and WENDY HOMEM,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

INTEC CORPORATION and JIM

CHAMBLEE,

Defendants /

No. C 05-0792 MMC

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION

FOR RECONSIDERATION; DENYING IN

PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION; SETTING

BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING

ON SHORTENED TIME ON

REMAINDER OF DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Before the Court is defendants’ motion, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9, to file a

motion for reconsideration of the Court’s order denying defendants’ motion to continue the

trial date and pretrial dates. Also before the Court is defendants’ application to have the

motion for reconsideration, if filed, heard on shortened time. Having reviewed the motion

and application, the Court rules as follows.1

Case 3:05-cv-00792-MMC Document 51 Filed 03/10/06 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

2

Because defendants seek reconsideration based on the emergence of new facts,

the Court hereby GRANTS defendants’ motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration,

see Civil L.R. 7-9(b)(2), and the motion for reconsideration attached as an exhibit to the

motion for leave to file the motion is hereby deemed filed as of the date of this order.

With the respect to defendants’ request therein to continue the Pretrial Conference

and related dates, defendants have made no showing as to good cause, and, accordingly,

the motion to continue, to the extent it seeks to continue said dates, is hereby DENIED.

With respect to defendants’ request therein to continue the trial date, although

defendants have made some showing as to the availability of trial counsel and one witness,

defendants have failed to explain the significance of such witness to the proceedings.

Accordingly, defendants will be afforded the opportunity to file, no later than March

14, 2006, a supplemental declaration clarifying the need for such witness’s presence at the

trial. Any opposition to defendants’ request to continue the trial date shall be filed no later

than March 17, 2006, by 3:00 p.m. The hearing on the request to continue the trial date will

be conducted on March 20, 2006, at 10:00 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 10, 2006 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-00792-MMC Document 51 Filed 03/10/06 Page 2 of 2