Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-05232/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-05232-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

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

1Plaintiffs have also noticed hearings on January 31, 2006 for their motions to compel discovery from defendants

Verisign, Charles Wurtz, Regina Rygelis, Gary Berkowitz and Brian Roe. To date, the motions remain unopposed. If

defendants do not file a request for relief by January 24, 2006, the court will rule on these motions as unopposed. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

DAN L. WHITNEY, JANET R. HADLEY,

MARGARET A. KORNOW-BROWN, ERIC

BRELLE,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

CHARLES WURTZ, VERISCAPE, INC.,

RENEE TADLOCK, REGINA RYGELIS, WILL

ARNTZ, SAM JACOBS, GARY BERKOWITZ

and BRIAN ROE,

Defendants.

 /

No. C-04-05232 PVT

ORDER RE SCHEDULING OF

HEARING AND BRIEFS FOR

PLAINTIFFS' WRIT OF ATTACHMENT 

On December 22, 2005, Plaintiffs electronically filed an application for a right to

attach order and an order for issuance of a writ of attachment against defendant Verisign, Inc.

("Verisign"). Plaintiffs submitted their application using California state forms and noticed a

hearing date for January 31, 2006.1 Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure 483.015,

the application notice states that the defendant may file with the court an opposition to the

application five days before the hearing date. The instruction conflicts with this court's local

rules, which state that: "Any opposition to a motion must be served and filed not less than 21

Case 5:04-cv-05232-PVT Document 56 Filed 01/18/06 Page 1 of 3
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

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

days before the hearing date." Civ. L.R. 7-3.

Accordingly, the court specially sets the hearing for February 7, 2006 at 10:00 AM. 

Defendant Verisign's opposition shall be filed no later than January 24, 2006 and Plaintiffs'

reply shall be filed no later than January 31, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 1/ 18/2006 

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 5:04-cv-05232-PVT Document 56 Filed 01/18/06 Page 2 of 3
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

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

3

copies faxed and mailed on October 18, 2005 to:

 _______________________________

 CORINNE LEW

 Courtroom Deputy 

Case 5:04-cv-05232-PVT Document 56 Filed 01/18/06 Page 3 of 3