Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-cv-04599/USCOURTS-cand-3_00-cv-04599-6/pdf.json

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

---

CITY OF OAKLAND’S APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME RE ORDER OF DEC 22, 2005

 - Allen / Case No. C-00-4599 (Master File) 

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

Gregory M. Fox, State Bar No. 070876 

Nancy A. Huneke, State Bar No. 114973 

BERTRAND, FOX & ELLIOT 

The Waterfront Building - 2749 Hyde Street 

San Francisco, California 94109 

Email: gfox@bfesf.com 

Telephone: 415.353.0999 

Facsimile: 415.353.0990 

John A. Russo, City Attorney, State Bar No. 129729 

Randolph W. Hall, Chief Assist. City Attorney, State Bar No. 080142 

Rocio V. Fierro, Senior Deputy City Attorney, State Bar No. 139565 

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 

CITY OF OAKLAND 

One Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Sixth Floor 

Oakland, California 94612 

Telephone: 510.238.3601 

Facsimile: 510.238.6500 

Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF OAKLAND 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DELPHINE ALLEN, et al., 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

CITY OF OAKLAND, et al., 

 Defendants. 

_______________________________________

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MASTER FILE: No. C-00-4599-TEH 

CITY OF OAKLAND’S APPLICATION 

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME RE: COURT’S 

DECEMBER 22, 2005 ORDER SETTING 

DEADLINES FOLLOWING DECEMBER 8 

2005 CASE MANAGEMENT 

CONFERENCE 

 The Court’s Order of December 22, 2005 Re: Setting Deadlines Following December 8 2005 

Case Management Conference, required that the Office of the City Attorney review and assess the 

retaliation claims reviewed by the IMT during its November 2005 audit of Task 37 of the settlement 

Case 3:00-cv-04599-WHO Document 278 Filed 02/27/06 Page 1 of 2
CITY OF OAKLAND’S APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME RE ORDER OF DEC 22, 2005

 - Allen / Case No. C-00-4599 (Master File) 

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

agreement and file a report of its findings and any proposed remedial actions by March 1, 2006. The 

Office of the City Attorney respectfully requests a one-week extension to March 8, 2006 to file its 

report. Plaintiffs’ counsel James B. Chanin does not oppose the extension. IMT Kelli Evans on 

behalf of the IMT does not oppose the extension. Good cause for the extension exists in that Ms. 

Vicki Laden Esq. of the City Attorney’s Office has been representing the City in a week long 

arbitration regarding the closing of the Oakland City Jail and has been working closely with the IMT 

and outside counsel on the independent investigation of certain matters relating to OPD’s IAD which 

are also the concern of this Court. Ms. Laden has stated to Mr. Fox that the extension will allow her 

to complete her report as required by the Court by March 8, 2006. 

 This is the first extension requested by the City relating to the December 22, 2006 Order. All 

other deadlines have been completed on time as required by the Court. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Dated: February 23, 2006 BERTRAND, FOX, & ELLIOT 

By: /s/ 

Gregory M. Fox 

Attorney for Defendants 

 ORDER OF THE COURT

 Good Cause Appearing, the application of the City of Oakland for an extension until March 8, 

2006 for the Office of the City Attorney to file its report re: findings and recommendations relating to 

complaints of retaliation is granted. 

Dated: ____________, 2006 ___________________________________ 

 Hon. Thelton E. Henderson 

 United States District Court Judge 

 Feb. 27,

Case 3:00-cv-04599-WHO Document 278 Filed 02/27/06 Page 2 of 2