Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06366/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06366-4/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

1

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

JAMES R. SUTTON, State Bar No. 135930

ION B. MEYN, State Bar No. 212640

GABE CAMARILLO, State Bar No. 237683

THE SUTTON LAW FIRM

150 Post Street, Suite 405

San Francisco, California

Tel: (415) 732-7700

Fax: (415) 732-7701

Attorneys for OakPAC, Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce; Oakland

Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce Independent Expenditure Committee (“Oak-IEPAC”); Michael Colbruno; and Scott Peterson.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKPAC, OAKLAND )

METROPOLITAN CHAMBER OF )

COMMERCE, an unincorporated )

association, OAKLAND )

METROPOLITAN CHAMBER OF )

COMMERCE INDEPENDENT )

EXPENDITURE COMMITTEE (“OAK- )

IE-PAC”), an unincorporated association; )

MICHAEL COLBRUNO, an individual; )

and SCOTT B. PETERSON, an )

individual; )

 )

Plaintiffs, )

 )

v. )

 )

THE CITY OF OAKLAND; THE CITY )

OF OAKLAND PUBLIC ETHICS )

COMMISSION; DOES 1 )

through 10. )

 )

Defendants. )

__________________________________)

 

Case No. C 06-6366 MJJ

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER 

STIPULATION

Having conferred with the Court regarding the effect of the Court’s October 19,

2006 Temporary Restraining Order, all parties in the above entitled case wish to expedite

the resolution of this case and reach a decision on the merits regarding the

constitutionality of Oakland Municipal Code (“OMC”) sections 3.12.050(C-E) and

3.12.060(C-E) in a manner that avoids duplicative proceedings and the unnecessary use of

Case 3:06-cv-06366-MJJ Document 27-1 Filed 10/30/2006 Page 1 of 3
 Case 3:06-cv-06366-WHA Document 28 Filed 10/31/06 Page 1 of 3
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

judicial resources. One constraint to this effort is the schedule of the Oakland City

Council, which can not meet in closed session until December 5 to determine whether

Defendants would informally agree to a preliminary injunction pending the final outcome

of this case.

To this end, Plaintiffs OakPAC, Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce,

Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce Independent Expenditure Committee,

Michael Colbruno, and Scott Peterson, on the one hand, and Defendants City of Oakland

and the City of Oakland Public Ethics Commission, on the other hand, by and through

their respective counsel, hereby stipulate, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

65(b), to extend the Court’s October 19, 2006 Temporary Restraining Order’s expiration

date from November 2 to December 12. After conferring with the Court, the parties

consent to a status conference on Tuesday, December 12, at a time convenient to the

Court, in order to determine a briefing schedule for a dispositive hearing on the merits. 

SO STIPULATED.

Dated: October 30, 2006 By: ________/s/______________________ GABE CAMARILLO

The Sutton Law Firm, P.C.

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Dated: October 30, 2006 By: ________________________________

JOHN A. RUSSO, City Attorney 

MARK T. MORODOMI, Supervising Deputy City

Attorney

Attorneys for Defendants

Case 3:06-cv-06366-MJJ Document 27-1 Filed 10/30/2006 Page 2 of 3
 Case 3:06-cv-06366-WHA Document 28 Filed 10/31/06 Page 2 of 3
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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

ORDER

The parties having so stipulated, and for good cause showing, IT IS ORDERED

that the expiration date of the October 19 Temporary Restraining Order shall be extended

from November 2 to December 12. The Court hereby orders all parties to appear at a

status conference for Tuesday, December 12, at _______ am/pm, in which parties will

agree to a briefing schedule on a dispositive hearing on the merits. 

Dated: _____________, 2006 ________________________________

Federal District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-06366-MJJ Document 27-1 Filed 10/30/2006 Page 3 of 3

2:00 October 31

*Accordingly, 

The Preliminary Injuction hearing set for November 1, 2006, is VACATED.

*

Case 3:06-cv-06366-WHA Document 28 Filed 10/31/06 Page 3 of 3