Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01634/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01634-11/pdf.json

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

---

______________________________________________________________________________________ ________________ 

Stipulation for an Extension to Allow Defendants to Respond to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Conference Demand

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

THERESA A. GOLDNER, COUNTY COUNSEL

By: ANDREW C. THOMSON, DEPUTY (SBN 149057)

Kern County Administrative Center

1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor

Bakersfield, CA. 93301

Telephone 661-868-3800

Fax 661-868-3805

Attorneys for Defendants Kern County, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADRIANA LEDESMA, an individual; 

JESSICA LEDESMA, an individual; 

MARISSA LEDESMA, an individual by 

and through her Guardian Ad Litem 

Raquel Sierra; RONNIE MATHEW 

LEDESMA, an individual by and 

through his Guardian Ad Litem

Christina Garcia; CHRISTINA 

HERRERA,

 Plaintiffs,

vs.

KERN COUNTY, KERN COUNTY 

SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; 

WARREN MARTIN; KARENA DE LA 

GARZA; DWAYNE PERKINS; JAMES 

MELTON; CHRISTOPHER WONG; 

AND DOES 1-200, inclusive,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 1:14-CV-01634-DAD-JLT

STIPULATION FOR A SHORT EXTENSION

OF TIME TO ALLOW DEFENDANTS TO 

RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS’ COURT 

ORDERED SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 

DEMAND; PROPOSED ORDER

(Doc. 66)

COME NOW the Parties in this matter, and present this Stipulation for a Short 

Extension of Time to Allow Defendants to Respond to Plaintiffs’ Court Ordered Settlement 

Conference Demand.

Plaintiffs Adriana Ledesma, Jessica Ledesma, Marissa Ledesma by and through her 

Guardian Ad Litem Raquel Sierra, Ronnie Mathew Ledesma by and through his Guardian Ad 

Litem Christina Garcia, and Christina Herrera (hereinafter collectively “Plaintiffs”) are Jointly 

represented by Mark Geragos, Ben Meiselas and David Gammill of Geragos & Geragos.

Case 1:14-cv-01634-DAD-JLT Document 67 Filed 10/19/16 Page 1 of 3
______________________________________________________________________________________ ________________ 

Stipulation for an Extension to Allow Defendants to Respond to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Conference Demand

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

Defendants, County of Kern and Deputies Martin, DeLaGarza, Perkins, Wong and 

Melton, (hereinafter collectively “Defendants”) are represented by Andrew C. Thomson, of the 

Office of Kern County Counsel. 

Plaintiff and Defendants are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Parties.”

IT IS HEREBY AGREED, by and between the Parties, through their respective counsel 

of record, that an Order be entered allowing Defendants a seven (7) day extension of the deadline 

for Defendants to provide their Court ordered response to Plaintiffs Court ordered settlement 

demand. The Parties proposed that Defendants will provide a response to Plaintiffs’ Court 

ordered settlement demand on or before October 28, 2016, which is seven (7) days later than the 

October 21, 2016 date identified in the Scheduling Order (Document 17), and seven (7) days 

prior to the scheduled Settlement Conference.

1. The Parties have met and conferred regarding the requested brief extension and believe 

that the request is reasonable.

2. Plaintiffs’ Court ordered demand letter was sent via e-mail on the evening of Friday, 

October 14, 2016, and was received by Defendants on the morning of October 17, 2016.

3. Defendants need to present the settlement demand to the Board of Supervisors for review, 

consideration and, if appropriate, settlement authority. 

4. The Board of Supervisors holds meetings on most Tuesdays, including meetings 

scheduled for October 18th and 25th, 2016. However, Defendants cannot present the matter to 

the Board on October 18, 2016 since the deadline for the Board agenda has passed and the matter 

does not constitute an emergency agenda item sufficient to be heard on shortened notice under 

the Brown Act.

5. The Parties are informed and believe that the foregoing will not adversely affect the 

Settlement Conference, 

6. The Parties are informed and believe that a reasoned, thoughtful response will facilitate 

the Settlement Conference process.

7. The Parties respectfully request the Court’s consideration of this request.

Case 1:14-cv-01634-DAD-JLT Document 67 Filed 10/19/16 Page 2 of 3
______________________________________________________________________________________ ________________ 

Stipulation for an Extension to Allow Defendants to Respond to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Conference Demand

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

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED:

The Scheduling Conference Order shall be amended to provide that Defendants will respond to 

Plaintiffs’ Court ordered settlement demand on or before October 28, 2016.

Dated: October 17, 2016 GERAGOS & GERAGOS

 By_/s/ Ben Meiselas _ 

 Ben Meiselas

David Gammill

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Dated: October 18, 2016 THERESA A. GOLDNER, COUNTY COUNSEL

 By_/s/ Andrew C. Thomson _ 

Andrew C. Thomson, Deputy

 Attorneys for Defendants

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 18, 2016 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01634-DAD-JLT Document 67 Filed 10/19/16 Page 3 of 3