Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-00448/USCOURTS-cand-4_04-cv-00448-0/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

SHANNON GALLAGHER, et al. v. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, et al. Page 1 USDC, Northern District, Case No. C 04-0448 SBA

PLAINTIFF’S MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE UP TO A 20 PAGE REPLY BRIEF 

TO DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION; [PROPOSED] ORDER

LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN

Mark E. Merin, SBN. 043849

Cathleen A. Williams, SBN 68029

Jeffrey I. Schwarzschild, SBN. 192086

2001 P Street, Suite 100

Sacramento, California 95814

Telephone: (916) 443-6911

Facsimile: (916) 447-8336

E-Mail: mark@markmerin.com

CASPER, MEADOWS & SCHWARTZ

Andrew Charles Schwartz, SBN 064578

Thom Seaton, SBN 62713

Micha Star Liberty, SBN 215687

2121 N California Boulevard, Suite 1020

Walnut Creek, CA 94596

Telephone: (925) 947-1147

Facsimile: (925) 947-1131

E-Mail: schwartz@cmslaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

—o0o—

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

—o0o—

SHANNON GALLAGHER, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, et al., 

Defendants.

CASE NO: C 04-0448 SBA

PLAINTIFF’S MISCELLANEOUS

ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR

LEAVE TO FILE UP TO A 20 PAGE

REPLY BRIEF TO DEFENDANTS’

OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION;

DECLARATION OF MARK E. MERIN;

ORDER 

[Local Rule 7-11]

DATE: June 7, 2005

TIME: 1:00 p.m.

CTRM: 3

JUDGE: Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong

REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE UP TO A 20-PAGE REPLY BRIEF

Plaintiff requests leave of Court to file up to a 20-page brief in reply to defendants’

opposition to plaintiff’s motion for class certification. This request is based on the necessity to

Case 4:04-cv-00448-SBA Document 21 Filed 05/27/05 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

SHANNON GALLAGHER, et al. v. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, et al. Page 1 USDC, Northern District, Case No. C 04-0448 SBA

PLAINTIFF’S MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE UP TO A 20 PAGE REPLY BRIEF 

TO DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION F 1 OR CLASS CERTIFICATION; [PROPOSED] ORDER

F:\WPWORK\MCNULTY\PLEADING\COMPLAIN.DOC

address fully the issues that defendants have raised in their 25-page opposition to plaintiff’s

motion for class certification, including new issues such as the following:

1. The applicability of the Prison Litigation Reform Act;

2. The number of persons required in a class to meet numerosity requirements;

3. Whether plaintiff has satisfied each and every requirement of 23(a) and 23(b) of the Rules

for class certification, including, e.g., typicality, commonality, manageability, and

superiority of the class action procedure.

Plaintiff has attempted to address these issues within the Court’s 15-page limit, but has

been unable to do so while also discussing the basic class certification criteria under Rule 23. 

Plaintiff therefore requests leave to file up to a 20-page reply to defendants’ opposition brief.

DATED: May 20, 2005 Respectfully submitted,

LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN

CASPER MEADOWS & SCHWARTZ

/s/

BY: 

Mark E. Merin

Attorney for Plaintiff

DECLARATION OF MARK E. MERIN IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S

MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE 

UP TO A 20 PAGE REPLY BRIEF TO DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION 

TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

I, Mark E. Merin, do declare and say:

1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of California and admitted to

practice before all of the District Courts in California, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal and U.S.

Supreme Court. My firm is the Law Office of Mark E. Merin.

2. This firm represents named plaintiff in this action in association with Casper,

Meadows & Schwartz.

3. On May 20, 2005, I attempted to contact defendants’ counsel, Carol Woodward,

to try and reach an agreement to file a stipulation allowing plaintiff to file a reply brief in excess

of 15 pages. Since I have not received a return call from Ms. Woodward, I am filing this Request

for Leave to file up to a 20 page Reply Brief. 

Case 4:04-cv-00448-SBA Document 21 Filed 05/27/05 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

SHANNON GALLAGHER, et al. v. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, et al. Page 2 USDC, Northern District, Case No. C 04-0448 SBA

PLAINTIFF’S MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE UP TO A 20 PAGE REPLY BRIEF 

TO DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION F 2 OR CLASS CERTIFICATION; [PROPOSED] ORDER

4. I have been diligently working on drafting plaintiff’s reply to defendants’

opposition to plaintiff’s motion for class certification since it was received at 5:27 p.m. by ECF

Service on May 17, 2005, and was unaware until today that plaintiff’s reply would require pages

in excess of 15. Pursuant to Judge Armstrong’s Standing Order regarding Motions, a request to

exceed the page limitations must be submitted to the court seven (7) days prior to the filing of the

motion (brief), or in this case, a request to exceed the page limitation should have been filed with

the court by Tuesday, May 17, 2005. There was no way plaintiff’s counsel could have know as

of May 17, 2005, they would be exceeding the page limitation on their reply brief or that they

would need to file a request to exceed the page limitation as of that date. In addition, having

received defendants’ opposition brief after close of business on May 17, 2005, it would have

been impossible for plaintiff to file a request to exceed page limitation in a timely manner.

5. Plaintiff’s reply brief will provide the court with the facts and applicable law

necessary to make its decision and plaintiff’s should be permitted to file a reply brief up to 20

pages.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above

is true and correct and that this declaration was executed this 20th day of May 2005, at

Sacramento, California.

 /s/ 

MARK E. MERIN

ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE UP TO A 20-PAGE REPLY BRIEF

FOR GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, plaintiff’s request to file up to a 20-page brief in

reply to defendants’ opposition to plaintiff’s motion for class certification is GRANTED. 

Plaintiff may file a brief not to exceed 20 pages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ________________ ________________________________________

HON. SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

U.S. District Court Judge, Northern District

5-27-05 /s/ Saundra Brown Armstrong

Case 4:04-cv-00448-SBA Document 21 Filed 05/27/05 Page 3 of 3