Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-03199/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-03199-2/pdf.json

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

---

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 

 

00445693.DOC Stip. and [Proposed] Order Staying Litigation 

No. C-07-3199 JSW 

PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP 

FREDERICK K. LOWELL #66641 

BRUCE A. ERICSON #76342 

bruce.ericson@pillsburylaw.com

ANITA D. STEARNS MAYO #142749 

MARC H. AXELBAUM #209855 

marc.axelbaum@pillsburylaw.com

AUGUST O. STOFFERAHN #229957 

august.stofferahn@pillsburylaw.com

50 Fremont Street 

Post Office Box 7880 

San Francisco, CA 94120-7880 

Telephone: (415) 983-1000 

Facsimile: (415) 983-1200 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DENNIS J. HERRERA, #139669 

City Attorney 

WAYNE K. SNODGRASS, #148137 

JONATHAN GIVNER, #208000 

ANN O'LEARY, #238408 

Deputy City Attorneys 

#1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place 

City Hall, Room 234 

San Francisco, California 94102-4682 

Telephone: (415) 554-4694 

Facsimile: (415) 554-4675 

E-Mail: jon.givner@sfgov.org 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

COMMITTEE ON JOBS CANDIDATE 

ADVOCACY FUND, et al.,

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

DENNIS J. HERRERA, in his official 

capacity as City Attorney of the City and 

County of San Francisco, et al., 

 Defendants. 

Case No. C-07-3199 JSW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] 

ORDER STAYING LITIGATION 

PENDING APPEAL IN SAN JOSE 

SILICON VALLEY CHAMBER OF 

COMMERCE PAC v. CITY OF SAN JOSE

(USCA Dkt. 06-17001)

Date: November 2, 2007 

Time: 1:30 p.m. 

Courtroom: 2, 17th Fl. 

Judge: Hon. Jeffrey S. White 

Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 50 Filed 10/25/2007 Page 1 of 5 Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 51 Filed 10/26/07 Page 1 of 5
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 

 

00445693.DOC - 1 - Stip. and [Proposed] Order Staying Litigation 

No. C-07-3199 JSW 

RECITALS 

A. On August 10, 2007, Plaintiffs Committee on JOBS Candidate Advocacy 

Fund and Building Owners and Managers Association of San Francisco Independent 

Expenditure PAC (“Plaintiffs”) moved for a Preliminary Injunction (“Motion”) to enjoin 

Defendants Dennis J. Herrera, in his official capacity as City Attorney of the City and 

County of San Francisco, Kamala D. Harris, in her official capacity as District Attorney of 

the City and County of San Francisco, the San Francisco Ethics Commission of the City 

and County of San Francisco, and the City and County of San Francisco (collectively, 

“Defendants”) from enforcing Sections 1.114(c)(1) and 1.114(c)(2) of the San Francisco 

Campaign Finance Reform Ordinance (“CFRO”), codified in the San Francisco Campaign 

and Governmental Conduct Code, and Regulation 1.114-2 of the Regulations to the CFRO. 

Dkt. 11-15, 28-30. 

B. Defendants opposed the Motion. Dkt. 19-23. 

C. The Court issued a Notice of Tentative Ruling and Questions (Dkt. 31) and 

then held oral argument on the Motion on September 17, 2007. Dkt. 35. 

D. On September 20, 2007, the Court entered an Order Granting Plaintiffs’ 

Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Dkt. 37 (“Order”). The Order by its terms “shall 

remain in effect until dissolved by further order of this Court.” Order at 9:12-13. 

E. This issues presented by this case are in some respects similar to those 

presented by San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce Political Action Committee v. 

City of San Jose, No. C-06-04252-JW, 2006 WL 3832794 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 20, 2006) 

(“COMPAC”), in which Judge Ware invalidated City of San Jose’s ordinance limiting 

contributions to independent expenditure committees and enjoined its enforcement. 

F. Defendants in COMPAC have appealed Judge Ware’s ruling to the Ninth 

Circuit. That appeal (the “COMPAC Appeal,” USCA Dkt. 06-17001) is fully briefed and 

awaiting oral argument. The outcome of the COMPAC Appeal is likely to provide 

significant guidance for further proceedings in this case. 

G. Given the status of the COMPAC appeal, Plaintiffs and Defendants believe 

Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 50 Filed 10/25/2007 Page 2 of 5 Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 51 Filed 10/26/07 Page 2 of 5
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 

 

00445693.DOC - 2 - Stip. and [Proposed] Order Staying Litigation 

No. C-07-3199 JSW 

that, in the interests of judicial economy, it would be best to stay further proceedings in this 

case, leaving the Order in place, until the Ninth Circuit rules on the COMPAC appeal, after 

which the parties and the Court can evaluate and discuss how best to proceed with this case. 

STIPULATION 

Plaintiffs and Defendants, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate 

as follows and request that the Court enter an order embodying this stipulation: 

1. All proceedings in this action shall be stayed until further order of the Court. 

2. The initial case management conference currently set for November 2, 2007 

shall be taken off calendar, to be reset on a date satisfactory to the Court after the Ninth 

Circuit panel’s decision in the COMPAC Appeal. 

3. Within thirty days after the Ninth Circuit panel’s decision in the COMPAC 

appeal, the parties shall meet and confer and then file a Notice of Ruling and Request for 

Case Management Conference, which shall set forth the parties’ proposed next steps for this 

litigation. 

4. During the pendency of the stay, the Order shall remain in effect. 

Dated: October 25, 2007. 

DENNIS J. HERRERA 

City Attorney 

WAYNE K. SNODGRASS 

 JONATHAN GIVNER 

 ANN M. O'LEARY 

 Deputy City Attorneys 

#1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place 

City Hall, Room 234 

San Francisco, California 94102-4682 

By /s/ Ann M. O'Leary 

 Ann M. O'Leary 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 50 Filed 10/25/2007 Page 3 of 5 Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 51 Filed 10/26/07 Page 3 of 5
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 

 

00445693.DOC - 3 - Stip. and [Proposed] Order Staying Litigation 

No. C-07-3199 JSW 

 Dated: October 25, 2007. 

PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP 

FREDERICK K. LOWELL 

BRUCE A. ERICSON 

ANITA D. STEARNS MAYO 

MARC H. AXELBAUM 

AUGUST O. STOFFERAHN 

50 Fremont Street 

Post Office Box 7880 

San Francisco, CA 94120-7880 

By /s/ Bruce A. Ericson 

Bruce A. Ericson 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

DECLARATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45, § X.B 

I, MARC H. AXELBAUM, hereby declare pursuant to General Order 45, § X.B, 

that I have obtained the concurrence in the filing of this document from the other signatory 

listed above. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing declaration is true and correct. 

Executed on October 25, 2007, at San Francisco, California. 

/s/ Marc H. Axelbaum 

 Marc H. Axelbaum 

Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 50 Filed 10/25/2007 Page 4 of 5 Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 51 Filed 10/26/07 Page 4 of 5
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 

 

00445693.DOC - 4 - Stip. and [Proposed] Order Staying Litigation 

No. C-07-3199 JSW 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Pursuant to the foregoing Stipulation, and good cause appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. All proceedings in this action are hereby STAYED. 

2. The Initial Case Management Conference currently set for November 2, 

2007 is hereby taken off calendar. 

3. Within thirty days of the Ninth Circuit panel’s decision in San Jose Silicon 

Valley Chamber of Commerce Political Action Committee v. City of San Jose, USCA Dkt. 

06-17001 (9th Cir.), the parties shall meet and confer and then file a Notice of Ruling and 

Request for Case Management Conference, which shall set forth the parties’ proposed next 

steps for this litigation. 

4. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the Order Granting Plaintiffs’ 

Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. 37) shall remain in effect during the pendency of 

the stay. 

 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: __________________ 

________ _________________________ 

Hon. Jeffrey S. White 

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 50 Filed 10/25/2007 Page 5 of 5

October 26, 2007

Case 3:07-cv-03199-JSW Document 51 Filed 10/26/07 Page 5 of 5