Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-00389/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-00389-10/pdf.json

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

---

1 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF REQUESTING LEAVE FOR PAGE LIMIT 

INCREASE TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT; ORDER 

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

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 

Carl L. Fessenden, SBN 161494 

cfessenden@porterscott.com 

Matthew W. Gross, SBN 324007 

mgross@porterscott.com

2180 Harvard Street, Suite 500 

Sacramento, California 95815 

TEL: 916.929.1481 

FAX: 916.927.3706 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Exempt from Filing Fees Pursuant to Government Code § 6103 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ESTATE OF WILLIAM HENNEFER, JAH, 

JUH, WH, NH AND BIANCA HENNEFER, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 

v. 

YUBA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 

OPERATOR OF THE YUBA COUNTY 

SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT SHERIFF 

WENDELL ANDERSON, 

UNDERSHERIFF NICHOLAS 

MORAWCZNSKI, CAPTAIN JOSEPH 

MILLION, LIEUTENANT BRANDON 

SPEAR, DEPUTY TENG SAECHAO, 

DETECTIVE ROGER TARWATER, 

DETECTIVE NATALIE MULLINS, 

DEPUTY RAYMON ELLIS, DEPUTY 

TYLER ECK, DEPUTY VALENTINO 

AGUIRRE, DEPUTY DALLAS THORPE, 

DEPUTY BRADON MALLORY AND 

DOES 1-15, 

 Defendants. 

___________________________________/

CASE NO. 2:22-cv-00389-TLN-CSK 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR 

ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF REQUESTING 

LEAVE FOR PAGE LIMIT INCREASE TO 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT; 

ORDER 

SAC: 8/12/24 

FAC: 07/21/23 

Complaint Filed: 02/27/22 

Defendants file this motion for administrative relief and seek leave from the Court to file a ten 

Case 2:22-cv-00389-TLN-CSK Document 61 Filed 12/23/24 Page 1 of 4
 2 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF REQUESTING LEAVE FOR PAGE LIMIT 

INCREASE TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT; ORDER 

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

(10) page limit extension to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment which shall be filed by no later 

than January 23, 2025 pursuant to the Courts Scheduling Order. 

Eastern District Local Rule 233 sets for the procedure for filing a motion for administrative 

relief: 

(1) must be labeled as a motion for administrative relief; 

(2) may not exceed 5 pages (excluding declarations and exhibits); 

(3) must set forth specifically the action requested, the reasons supporting the request, 

and relevant background information (such as a description of any similar relief that has 

previously been granted); 

(4) must be accompanied by a proposed order; 

(5) must include a statement setting forth the position of all parties affected by the 

motion, or a statement explaining why such position could not be ascertained; and 

(6) if manually filed, must be delivered with all attachments on all parties on the same 

day the motion is filed. 

On August 12, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”). (ECF 48) 

Plaintiffs’ SAC brings 17 claims for relief against 13 individually named Defendants. Plaintiffs’ SAC 

involves federal and state claims arising for a law enforcement traffic stop which resulted in a standoff 

and eventual death of William Hennefer. 

Defendants seek a ten (10) page extension to file Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment 

because Plaintiffs’ operative complaint contains 17 separate claims for relief—many of which are 

asserted against 13 Defendants in total. The claims against the individual Defendants involve separate 

and distinct actions over the traffic stop incident, multi-hour standoff, and eventual approach to the 

vehicle where William Hennefer was determined to be deceased. Defendants’ Motion for Summary 

Judgment will need to address each of the separate claims and distinct actions from each of the 

Defendants. To sufficiently address the claims against each Defendant within the Motion for Summary 

Judgment, Defendants need an additional ten-page extension (for a total of 30 pages) to file the Motion 

for Summary Judgment. This is the first time Defendants have requested such relief. Furthermore, this 

Court’s Standing Orders set for the requirements for seeking a page limit extension when filing a Motion 

for Summary Judgement. 

Case 2:22-cv-00389-TLN-CSK Document 61 Filed 12/23/24 Page 2 of 4
 3 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF REQUESTING LEAVE FOR PAGE LIMIT 

INCREASE TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT; ORDER 

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

On December 17, 2024, the parties had a phone call prior to the filing of the motion. Plaintiffs’ 

counsel stated he did not oppose the request, and the parties agreed Plaintiffs should be provided the 

same 30 pages for any Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment. The parties also discussed 

whether any deadline extensions would be provided for responding to the Motion for Summary 

Judgment, but no agreement has been reached at this point. 

Dated: December 23, 2024 PORTER SCOTT 

 A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 

By _/s/Matthew W. Gross____________ 

Carl L. Fessenden 

Matthew W. Gross 

Attorneys for Defendants 

 

Case 2:22-cv-00389-TLN-CSK Document 61 Filed 12/23/24 Page 3 of 4
 4 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF REQUESTING LEAVE FOR PAGE LIMIT 

INCREASE TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT; ORDER 

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

ORDER

 This Court hereby grants Defendants’ motion for administrative relief and permits Defendants to 

file a ten (10) page limit extension to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants’ Motion 

for Summary Judgment shall not exceed 30 pages. Plaintiff will be provided an opportunity to file a ten 

(10) page limit extension in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. 

Dated: December 23, 2024 

 

____________________________

Troy L. Nunley

Chief United States District Judge

Case 2:22-cv-00389-TLN-CSK Document 61 Filed 12/23/24 Page 4 of 4