Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-04997/USCOURTS-cand-5_03-cv-04997-3/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

Estate of Cau Bich Tran, et al.,

Plaintiff(s),

 v.

City of San Jose, et al.,

Defendant(s).

 /

NO. C 03-04997 JW 

ORDER RESETTING TRIAL DATES

On October 11, 2005, the Court conducted a case management conference to discuss Defendants’

application to vacate trial date and other deadlines. (See Docket Item No. 53.) Defendants contend that

the trial date should be vacated because the parties have scheduled a mediation for November 3, 2005

with a second full day of mediation scheduled for November 17, 2005. Defendants informed the Court

that the San Jose City Council will be advised and consulted about the mediation process. In addition,

Defendants intend file a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s September 30, 2005 Order granting in

part, denying in part, Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. If this is not successful, Defendant will

then filed an interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit on the qualified immunity issue which would prevent

the trial from going forward as scheduled. Plaintiffs intend to file a motion as soon as Defendants file their

Notice of Appeal, moving this Court to find the appeal frivolous and requesting the Court proceed with trial

as scheduled.

Case 5:03-cv-04997-JW Document 60 Filed 10/13/05 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

Though Plaintiffs maintain the Court should not vacate the trial date, at the conference, Plaintiffs

agreed to give Defendants additional time to file their appeal with a good faith believe that it will not

interfere with the mediation process.

Accordingly, the Court vacates previous set pretrial and trial dates and sets the following schedule

in light of these developments:

1) Plaintiffs’ counsel, Andrew Schwartz, shall initiate a telephone conference for all parties

regarding the status of mediation on November 9, 2005 at 1 p.m. 

2) Final pretrial conference is set for November 28, 2005 at 3 p.m. Pursuant to the Civil Local

Rules, the parties shall file a joint pretrial statement no later than November 21, 2005. 

3) Jury selection will begin on December 6, 2005 at 1 p.m.

4) Further jury trial is set for the following days from 1-4 p.m.: December 7, 2005 through

December 9, 2005; December 13, 2005 through December 16, 2005; December 20, 2005 through

December 23, 2005; and December 27, 2005 through December 30, 2005.

With respect to other deadlines such as deadline for hearing pretrial motions and disclosure of

expert and rebuttal witnesses, the Court will reexamine these dates at the November 9th, 2005 status

conference.

Dated: October 12, 2005 /s/ James Ware 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge

Case 5:03-cv-04997-JW Document 60 Filed 10/13/05 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

Andrew C. Schwartz schwartz@cmslaw.com

Clifford S. Greenberg cao.main@ci.sj.ca.us

Felicita Vu Ngo felicita_vu_ngo@yahoo.com

Karen L. Snell ksnell@clarencedyer.com

Michael R. Groves CAO.Main@ci.sj.ca.us

Dated: October 12, 2005 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: /s/ JW Chambers 

Ronald L. Davis

Courtroom Deputy

Case 5:03-cv-04997-JW Document 60 Filed 10/13/05 Page 3 of 3