Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_10-cv-01825/USCOURTS-cand-5_10-cv-01825-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Civil Rights

---

1

Stipulation Extending Time to Respondent to Complaint & Changing CV10-01825 HRL 

Date of the Initial CMC & Related Dates; [Proposed] Order 666266

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

PHUONG QUANG HO, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

CITY OF SAN JOSE, et al., 

 Defendants. 

CASE NO.: CV10-01825 HRL 

STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME

TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND 

CHANGING DATE OF THE INITIAL 

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

AND RELATED DATES; [PROPOSED] 

ORDER

IT IS STIPULATED BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT: 

Pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 6-1(b) and 6-2, the parties agree that 

Defendants, CITY OF SAN JOSE, CHIEF ROB DAVIS, SERGEANT J. MARTIN, OFFICER 

KENNETH SIEGAL, OFFICER STEVEN PAYNE, JR., OFFICER GABRIEL REYES, and 

OFFICER JEROME SMITH, shall have until August 19, 2010, to file a responsive pleading.

RICHARD DOYLE, City Attorney #88625

NORA FRIMANN, Assistant City Attorney #93249 

MICHAEL R. GROVES, Sr. Deputy City Attorney #85620 

CLIFFORD S. GREENBERG, Sr. Deputy City Attorney #122612 

SHANNON SMYTH-MENDOZA, Sr. Deputy City Attorney #188509 

Office of the City Attorney 

200 East Santa Clara Street 

San Jose, California 95113-1905 

Telephone: (408) 535-1900 

Facsimile: (408) 998-3131 

Email: CAO.Main@sanjoseca.gov

Attorneys for Defendants, 

CITY OF SAN JOSE, CHIEF ROB DAVIS, and SGT. J. MARTIN 

DUYEN H. NGUYEN, ESQ. #215909 

BRIAN M. NGO, ESQ. #262859 

STEVE L. HUYNH, ESQ. #265860 

Law Offices of Duyen H. Nguyen 

1569 Lexann Avenue, Suite 132 

San Jose, California 95121 

Telephone: (408) 528-7668 

Facsimile: (408) 528-7671 

Email: duyen@duyenlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff, 

PHUONG QUANG HO 

** E-filed June 15, 2010 **

Case 5:10-cv-01825-HRL Document 10 Filed 06/15/10 Page 1 of 4
2

Stipulation Extending Time to Respondent to Complaint & Changing CV10-01825 HRL 

Date of the Initial CMC & Related Dates; [Proposed] Order 666266

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

The requested extension will effect the current dates for filing the Joint Case Management 

Conference Statement, July 6, 2010 and the Initial Case Management Conference, July 13, 

2010. The parties stipulate to reset the date for the filing of the Joint Case Management 

Conference Statement to August 24, 2010 and the Initial Case Management Conference to 

August 31, 2010. The parties also stipulate and ask that the date of June 22, 2010 for the 

filing of the ADR Certification and the filing of either the Stipulation to ADR Process or Notice 

of Need for ADR Phone Conference be extended to August 19, 2010.

The reasons for this Stipulation and requested Order are as follows: 

This case involves Plaintiff Ho’s allegations of excessive force and related 

constitutional and state claims against Defendants arising from an incident on September 3, 

2009. The incident was partially videotaped and resulted in much publicity. A criminal 

investigation into the incident was conducted and the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s 

Office issued a report on March 3, 2010 regarding the incident. No criminal prosecutions of 

the individual officers took place. The same officers are now Defendants in this civil case.

An Internal Affairs investigation by the San Jose Police Department is currently taking 

place regarding the actions of the involved officers with no known date for conclusion. In 

both the criminal investigation and the Internal Affairs investigation Defendant Officers 

Jerome Smith and Gabriel Reyes are represented by Attorney William Rapoport, Defendant 

Officer Steven Payne, Jr., is represented by Attorney Craig Brown and Defendant Officer 

Kenneth Siegel is represented by Attorney Terry Bowman. 

The complicated issue of who will be representing these four individual officers in this 

federal civil case has yet to be resolved. The three aforementioned attorneys who have been 

representing the four individual Defendant Officers believe the City of San Jose should retain 

them to represent the officers in this civil case instead of the City Attorney’s Office due to the 

existence of alleged conflicts. Numerous discussions have already taken place between the 

City and the three attorneys and further discussions are scheduled and will continue. This 

issue must be worked out before the case can continue. The involved attorneys believe the 

requested change of dates will provide adequate time for this decision to be reached.

Case 5:10-cv-01825-HRL Document 10 Filed 06/15/10 Page 2 of 4
3

Stipulation Extending Time to Respondent to Complaint & Changing CV10-01825 HRL 

Date of the Initial CMC & Related Dates; [Proposed] Order 666266

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

After explaining this situation to Plaintiff Attorneys Duyen Nguyen and Glenn Miller 

during a meet and confer session regarding initial disclosures, etc., at the City Attorney’s 

Office on June 9, 2010, Plaintiff Attorneys graciously agreed to the request by the City and 

the three attorneys representing the four individual officers in the related matters detailed 

above, that this Stipulation be entered into and filed with the Court seeking the requested 

change in the dates as follows: 

Current Date: Requested Date:

Response to Complaint: June 17, 2010 (by 

Stipulation of 5/13/10) 

August 19, 2010 

Joint Case Management Conference 

Statement:

July 6, 2010 August 24, 2010 

Initial Case Management Conference: July 13, 2010 August 31, 2010 

File ADR Certification and Stipulation to 

Either ADR Process or Notice of Need 

for ADR Phone Conference: 

June 22, 2010 August 19, 2010 

These changes will essentially delay the start of the case by approximately two 

months and will have no other effect except to the dates mentioned above. 

DATED: June 15, 2010 RICHARD DOYLE, City Attorney 

By: __/s/ Michael R. Groves 

 MICHAEL R. GROVES 

 Sr. Deputy City Attorney 

Attorneys for Defendants, 

CITY OF SAN JOSE, CHIEF ROB DAVIS, 

and SGT. J. MARTIN 

//

//

//

//

//

Case 5:10-cv-01825-HRL Document 10 Filed 06/15/10 Page 3 of 4
4

Stipulation Extending Time to Respondent to Complaint & Changing CV10-01825 HRL 

Date of the Initial CMC & Related Dates; [Proposed] Order 666266

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: June 15, 2010 LAW OFFICES OF DUYEN H. NGUYEN 

By: __ /s/ Duyen H. Nguyen 

 DUYEN H. NGUYEN 

Attorneys for Plaintiff, 

PHUONG QUANG HO 

I affirm that Plaintiff’s counsel has consented to the electronic filing of this document 

on Plaintiff’s behalf. 

DATED: June 15, 2010 RICHARD DOYLE, City Attorney 

By: __/s/ Michael R. Groves 

 MICHAEL R. GROVES 

 Sr. Deputy City Attorney 

Attorneys for Defendants, 

CITY OF SAN JOSE, CHIEF ROB DAVIS, 

and SGT. J. MARTIN 

ORDER

 GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is so ordered that the current dates shall be changed 

to the requested dates. 

DATED: ______________ ____________________________________ 

HON. HOWARD R. LLOYD 

Magistrate Judge

June 15, 2010

Case 5:10-cv-01825-HRL Document 10 Filed 06/15/10 Page 4 of 4