Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04981/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04981-24/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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARGIE CHERRY and ESTORIA CHERRY, on

behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

THE CITY COLLEGE OF SAN FRANCISCO (“City

College”) LAWRENCE WONG, in his official capacity

as President of the Board of Trustees, MILTON

MARKS, III, in his official capacity as Vice-President of

the Board of Trustees, DR. NATALIE BERG,

JOHNNIE CARTER, JR., DR. ANITA GRIER, JULIO

J. RAMOS, RODEL E. RODIS, in their official

capacities as members of the Board of Trustees, and DR.

PHILIP R. RAY, JR., in his official capacity as

Chancellor,

Defendants. /

No. C 04-04981 WHA

REMINDER NOTICE OF

UPCOMING TRIAL AND

FINAL PRETRIAL

CONFERENCE

This notice serves as a friendly reminder that this case remains set for a FINAL

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE on JANUARY 30, 2006, at 2:00 P.M., with a BENCH TRIAL on

FEBRUARY 14, 2006. Please consult the existing case management order and review and follow

all standing guidelines and orders of the undersigned for civil cases on the Court’s website at

http://www.cand.uscourts.gov. Continuances will rarely be granted, especially after a lengthy

continuance was already granted in this case. Lead trial counsel have long been on notice of

those dates and must attend. 

Case 3:04-cv-04981-WHA Document 386 Filed 11/16/05 Page 1 of 2
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

27

28

2

The final pretrial conference will be an important event, for it will be there that the

shape of the upcoming trial will be determined, including in limine orders, time limits and

exhibit mechanics. Again, lead trial counsel must attend. 

The Court is aware that the parties are trying to mediate the case. To avoid any

misunderstanding with respect to the final pretrial conference and trial, however, the Court

wishes to emphasize that all filings and appearances must be made — on pain of dismissal,

default or other sanction — unless and until a dismissal fully resolving the case is received. It

will not be enough to inform the clerk that a settlement in principle has been reached or to lodge

a partially executed settlement agreement or to lodge a fully executed agreement (or dismissal)

that resolves less than the entire case. Where, however, a fully-executed and unconditional

settlement agreement clearly and fully disposing of the entire case is lodged reasonably in

advance of the pretrial conference or trial and only a ministerial act remains, the Court will

arrange a telephone conference to work out an alternate procedure pending a formal dismissal. 

Approval by a board has proven, in the Court’s experience, not to be a ministerial act. Please

plan accordingly. 

Dated: November 16, 2005. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:04-cv-04981-WHA Document 386 Filed 11/16/05 Page 2 of 2