Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-00626/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-00626-1/pdf.json

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

---

1 

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

Vanessa W. Vallarta, City Attorney #142404 

Susan J. Matcham, Assistant City Attorney #79562 

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 

200 Lincoln Avenue 

Salinas, CA 93901 

Telephone: (831) 758-7256 

Facsimile: (831) 758-7257 

Vincent P. Hurley #111215 

Amanda M. Cohen #243946 

LAW OFFICES OF VINCENT P. HURLEY 

A Professional Corporation 

38 Seascape Village 

Aptos, California 95003 

Telephone: (831) 661-4800 

Facsimile: (831) 661-4804 

Attorneys for Defendants 

CITY OF SALINAS, CITY OF SALINAS POLICE CHIEF DANIEL ORTEGA, 

POLICE OFFICER STEVEN MATTOCKS, and 

POLICE OFFICER ROBERT BALAORO 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARIA IRMA DELA TORRE 

DECEASED, THROUGH HER 

SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST, JOSE 

MAXIMILIANO LICEA ABACA; MARIA 

DELA TORRE, individually; and JOSE 

MAXIMILIANO LICEA ABACA, 

individually 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

CITY OF SALINAS, a public entity, CITY 

OF SALINAS POLICE CHIEF DANIEL 

ORTEGA in his individual and official 

capacities, POLICE OFFICER STEVEN 

MATTOCKS, Individually, POLICE 

OFFICER ROBERT BALAORO, 

Individually, and DOES 1 through 10, 

Jointly and Severally, 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No: C09-00626 RMW

STIPULATION AND [] 

ORDER AMENDING THE 

SCHEDULING ORDER OF 

OCTOBER 20, 2009 

Stipulation & Order Amending Scheduling Order Case No. C09-00626 RMW 

*E-FILED - 3/30/10*

Case 5:09-cv-00626-RMW Document 29 Filed 03/30/10 Page 1 of 4
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

This case involves the wrongful death and civil rights claims of Jose Maximiliano Licea 

Abarca and Maria Dela Torre, arising from the death of Maria Irma Dela Torre when she was 

shot by Defendant police officer Steven Mattocks. Plaintiffs’ attorneys, Michael Haddad and 

Julie Sherwin, were scheduled to begin trial in the United States District Court, San Francisco, 

before the Honorable Marilyn Hall-Patel, the first trial scheduled in ten related civil rights cases 

[lead related case, Taylor et al. v. City of Oakland, et al., No. C-04-4843 MHP], which was 

scheduled to begin on February 9, 2010. Attorneys Haddad and Sherwin were actively preparing 

for that trial in December 2009 and January 2010, but due to criminal trials before Judge Patel, 

the trial was continued twice, and is now set to commence on March 9, 2010. The preparation 

for and litigation of that trial, which is expected to last three to four weeks, will require the full 

attention of attorneys Haddad and Sherwin. 

The parties have been vigorously pursuing discovery and trial preparation in this case, but 

for the attention of attorneys Haddad and Sherwin to their other trial. To date, the Defendants 

have completed the depositions of Plaintiffs and one family member, and would like to take the 

depositions of two other family members who left for Mexico and are not anticipated to return 

until late-February or early-March. Defendants have also taken the depositions of percipient 

witnesses to the events. 

Plaintiffs’ attorneys have taken the depositions of the Defendant officers, and propounded 

and received voluminous documents pursuant to discovery requests. Plaintiffs’ attorneys have 

noticed the depositions of various police officers and administrators for May 2010. 

There are currently two outstanding discovery disputes. Plaintiffs intend to file a motion 

to quash subpoenas served by Defendants on the United States Customs and Immigration Service 

and the Department of Homeland Security relating to records of Maria Dela Torre Salgado, as 

Plaintiff claims the subpoenas violate federal law, the privacy rights of Plaintiff, and seek 

information that is neither relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead the discovery of admissible 

evidence, and are unduly burdensome and harassing. Plaintiffs made a demand for records 

relating to a subsequent shooting incident involving Defendant Mattocks, and Defendants 

objected to the demand on the grounds that it was irrelevant and not likely to lead to the 

Stipulation & Order Amending Scheduling Order Case No. C09-00626 RMW 

Case 5:09-cv-00626-RMW Document 29 Filed 03/30/10 Page 2 of 4
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

discovery of admissible evidence as a subsequent event. Though the parties have been in meet 

and confer on those issues, Defendants contend that, if the federal authorities to whom subpoenas 

were served refuse to produce the documents that Plaintiffs object to them producing, motions to 

compel and applications for orders to show cause regarding contempt will have to be heard by 

the Court. 

The parties have met and conferred on proposed dates (listed below) that will allow the 

parties to complete discovery, to consider engaging in further private ADR, and to prepare for 

trial if necessary. 

The attorneys for the parties have agreed to a proposed trial date of Monday, 

November 8, 2010, and the following proposed schedule amending the scheduling order of 

October 20, 2009: 

 Non-expert discovery cut-off May 28, 2010 

 Expert disclosures June 25, 2010 

 Dispositive motions heard August 6, 2010 

 Expert discovery closes September 17, 2010 

 Joint pretrial statements filed October 15, 2010 

 Joint pretrial conference October 21, 2010 

 Trial November 8, 2010 

The parties request that the Court so order, or that the Court make an order for a trial date 

in November that meets the Court’s convenience. 

Dated: March 3, 2010 

LAW OFFICES OF VINCENT P. HURLEY 

By: /s/ Vincent P. Hurley 

 VINCENT P. HURLEY 

Attorneys for Defendants, City of Salinas, et al. 

Dated: March 2, 2010 

CURD, GALINDO & SMITH, LLP

By: /s/ Alexis Galindo

 ALEXIS GALINDO 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Maximiliano Licea Abarca

Stipulation & Order Amending Scheduling Order Case No. C09-00626 RMW 

Case 5:09-cv-00626-RMW Document 29 Filed 03/30/10 Page 3 of 4
4 

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

Dated: March 2, 2010 

HADDAD & SHERWIN 

By: /s/ Michael J. Haddad 

 MICHAEL J. HADDAD 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Maria Dela Torre 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

Honorable Ronald M. Whyte 

Judge of the United States District Court 

Northern District of California 

Stipulation & Order Amending Scheduling Order Case No. C09-00626 RMW 

3/30/10

Case 5:09-cv-00626-RMW Document 29 Filed 03/30/10 Page 4 of 4