Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07783/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-07783-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination

---

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 

David M. Poore, SBN 192541 

KAHN BROWN & POORE LLP 

755 Baywood Drive, Suite 185 

Petaluma, California 94954 

Telephone: (707) 763-7100 

Facsimile: (707) 763-7180 

dpoore@kahnbrownlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

BRIAN J. PATENAUDE 

Gregory G. Spaulding, SBN 106606 

Lisa Ann Hilario, SBN 148460 

Spaulding McCullough & Tansil LLP 

90 South "E" St #200 

PO Box 1867 

Santa Rosa, CA 95402-1867 

Telephone: (707) 524-1900 

Facsimile: (707) 524-1906 

e-mail: hilario@smlaw.com

Attorneys for Defendants 

COUNTY OF SONOMA of which 

SONOMA COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT 

is a department 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BRIAN J. PATENAUDE,

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

COUNTY OF SONOMA; SONOMA 

COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; 

SEAN MCDERMOTT; DOLORES 

ROBINSON; RANDY NORTH; PHILLIP 

LAWRENCE; and DOES 1 through 50, 

inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. C06-07783 MHP

JOINT STIPULATION AND PROPOSED 

ORDER TO CONTINUE THE INITIAL 

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

AND RE-SET DEADLINES 

Current Case Management Conference: April 

30, 2007, 4:00 p.m.

Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel 

 -1-

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

PATENAUDE V. COUNTY OF SONOMA, ET AL., CASE NO. C06-07783 MHP 

Case 3:06-cv-07783-MHP Document 4 Filed 04/24/07 Page 1 of 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 

WHEREAS, a Case Management Conference in the above-captioned matter is currently 

set for April 30, 2007, at 4:00 p.m., before this Court; 

WHEREAS, lead trial counsel representing Plaintiff plans to attend the Case Management 

Conference in person, but has a pre-scheduled family-medical leave during the period of 

approximately April 25, 2007 through May 8, 2007. The period of leave may be longer 

depending upon the circumstances; 

WHEREAS, counsel for Plaintiff and counsel for Defendant COUNTY OF SONOMA are 

in the process of meeting and conferring to discuss and possibly resolve a potential motion under 

Rule 12. The requested continuance would allow the parties to continue their meet and confer 

efforts and potentially resolve the matter without the necessity of filing a motion. However, the 

parties need additional time to conduct research and further meet and confer to potentially avoid 

Court intervention in this matter; 

WHEREAS, the individual defendants SEAN MCDERMOTT; DOLORES ROBINSON; 

RANDY NORTH; PHILLIP LAWRENCE have not yet been served with the complaint in this 

action. Counsel for the Defendant COUNTY OF SONOMA is conferring with her client 

regarding accepting service on behalf of these individual defendants who are employees of the 

COUNTY. An extension of time would allow the remaining individual defendants to file and 

serve any responsive pleading at the same time as defendant COUNTY OF SONOMA; 

WHEREAS, there was some initial delay in service of the complaint in that Plaintiff’s

counsel was out of the office on family-medical leave during the months of January and February 

2007; 

WHEREAS, the parties have jointly agreed and stipulated to respectfully request that this 

Court continue the Case Management Conference for a period of 45 to 60 days; 

WHEREAS, this request is not being made for the purposes of delay, or any other 

improper purpose; instead, this request is being made to allow lead trial counsel to participate 

meaningfully at the CMC, and would provide the parties sufficient time to meet and confer to 

potentially resolve the pending issues with respect to a Rule 12 motion; 

 -2-

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

PATENAUDE V. COUNTY OF SONOMA, ET AL., CASE NO. C06-07783 MHP 

Case 3:06-cv-07783-MHP Document 4 Filed 04/24/07 Page 2 of 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 

WHEREAS, continuing the Case Management Conference for a period of 45 to 60 days 

will not prejudice either party or their counsel and will promote judicial economy; 

WHEREAS, moving the Case Management Conference for a period of 45 to 60 days will 

allow for the defendants to appear in this action; 

WHEREAS, the parties agree that the following constitutes good cause to continue the

initial CMC, including the deadlines for filing responsive pleadings, initial disclosures, meet and 

confer regarding initial disclosures, the filing of responsive pleadings, and the filing of the joint 

CMC statement; 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and agreed by Plaintiff and 

Defendant, through their respective attorneys of record, that the Case Management Conference in 

this action, currently set for April 30, 2007 at 4:00 p.m., be continued either to June 25, 2007 or 

July 2, 2007 at 4:00 p.m., or to a date and time that the Court may deem appropriate. The parties 

further stipulate to extend the following deadlines accordingly: (1) last day to complete initial 

disclosures, state objections, and file joint CMC statement and file/serve Rule 26(f) report: June 

11, 2007; (2) last day to meet and confer regarding initial disclosures and file Joint ADR 

Certification with Stipulation: May 18, 2007; and (3) last day to file an answer and/or Rule 12 

motion: May 8, 2007. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: April 6, 2007 KAHN BROWN & POORE LLP 

 By: /s/ 

David M. Poore 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

\\\ 

\\\ 

\\\ 

 -3-

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

PATENAUDE V. COUNTY OF SONOMA, ET AL., CASE NO. C06-07783 MHP 

Case 3:06-cv-07783-MHP Document 4 Filed 04/24/07 Page 3 of 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: April 6, 2007 SPAULDING MCCULLOUGH & TANSIL LLP 

 

 By:__ _________/s/____________________ 

Lisa Ann Hilario 

Attorneys for Defendant 

COUNTY OF SONOMA 

Filer’s Attestation: David M. Poore and Lisa Ann Hilario hereby attest that they have in their 

respective files their holograph signatures for any of their signatures indicated by a "conformed" 

signature /s/ within this e-filed document. 

ORDER

Having reviewed the Stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing: 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Case Management Conference in this action, 

currently set for April 30, 2007, be continued to __________________, 2007 at 4:00 p.m. in 

Courtroom 15, 18th Floor, San Francisco, California. The deadlines stated above will be re-set in 

accordance with the stipulation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: _____ _, 2007 

 Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel 

 -4-

JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

PATENAUDE V. COUNTY OF SONOMA, ET AL., CASE NO. C06-07783 MHP 

June 25 are hereby April 23

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:06-cv-07783-MHP Document 4 Filed 04/24/07 Page 4 of 4