Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00399/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00399-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
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 07cv399 LAB (NLS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION, a

Delaware corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, California,

THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH CITY OF

SAN DIEGO, California, AND THE

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF SAN

DIEGO, California,

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No.07cv0399 LAB (NLS)

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING

SCHEDULE FOR EX PARTE

APPLICATION 

[Doc. No 18]

Plaintiff American Tower Corporation filed, without leave of court, an amended complaint on

August 29, 2007. On September 5, 2007, the Court ordered the amended complaint stricken from the

record because Plaintiff did not have leave of court to file it, per Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a). 

Two days later Plaintiff filed an Ex Parte application for retraction of the discrepancy order, or in the

alternative, for leave to file the first amended complaint dated August 29, 2007 [Doc. No. 18]. The

presiding district judge referred this matter to the undersigned for decision pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

631(b)(1)(A).

The Court construes Plaintiff’s Ex Parte application as a motion for reconsideration of the

September 5, 2007 discrepancy order [Doc. No. 17] and for leave to file the first amended complaint

nunc pro tunc to August 29, 2007. 

Case 3:07-cv-00399-BEN-WVG Document 20 Filed 09/13/07 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 07cv399 LAB (NLS)

In the event that Defendants choose to file an opposition to Plaintiff’s application, they must do

so on or before September 20, 2007. The opposition shall not exceed 8 pages in length. Plaintiff may

file a reply brief on or before September 24, 2007. The reply, if any, shall not exceed 4 pages in length.

Upon receipt of all the briefs, the Court will determine whether it will hold oral argument on the matter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 13, 2007

Hon. Nita L. Stormes

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00399-BEN-WVG Document 20 Filed 09/13/07 Page 2 of 2