Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-03723/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-03723-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination

---

United States District Court

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLARK WALKER,

Plaintiff,

v.

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, et al.

Defendants.

NO. C03-3723 TEH 

ORDER VACATING PRE-TRIAL

AND TRIAL DATES AND

SCHEDULING SUMMARY

JUDGMENT MOTION

On May 11, 2005, the Court ordered the filing of revised opposition and reply briefing

on defendants’ motion for summary judgment, and took the hearing on that motion off

calendar. The cause for that inconvenience to the Court and defendants was plaintiff’s

counsel’s improper notice to the Court that counsel planned to rely at oral argument on points

and authorities regarding a mixed-motive theory that had been entirely omitted from the

original opposition brief. Having ordered and received the revised briefing, the Court now sets

hearing on the motion for July 11, 2005 at 10:00 a.m.

Given the current scheduling of the summary judgment hearing, the Court VACATES

the pre-trial conference and trial dates (currently set for June 27 and July 12, 2005

respectively), as well as the deadlines for submission of all pre-trial filings -- including the

pre-trial conference statement, jury instructions, verdict forms, in limine motions, and lodging

of exhibits -- which will be reset following determination of the summary judgment motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED June 16, 2005 /s/ 

THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 3:03-cv-03723-TEH Document 95 Filed 06/16/05 Page 1 of 1