Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04632/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04632-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
Cause of Action: 18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) 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

Law Off ices

McInerney &

Dillon, P.C.

Oakland, California STIPULATION/PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 1

Timothy L. McInerney, #124807

LeCarie S. Whitfield #192186

Gregory J. Gangitano, #226987

McInerney & Dillon, P.C.

One Kaiser Plaza, 18th Floor

Oakland, California 94612-3610

Tel (510) 465-7100; Fax (510) 465-8556

William J. McGahan, #165706

General Counsel

F.W. Spencer & Son, Inc.

1422 Harrison Street

Oakland, California 94612

Tel (510) 451-2300; Fax (510) 238-1059

Attorneys for defendants F.W. Spencer & Son, Inc., 

Brisbane Mechanical Co., William D. Spencer, 

William McGahan and Bruce Bonar

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID

TRANSIT DISTRICT, for itself and for and

in the name of the people of the State of

California,

Plaintiff,

v.

WILLIAM D. SPENCER, F.W. SPENCER

& SON, INC., BRISBANE MECHANICAL

CO., WILLIAM M. McGAHAN, BRUCE

R. BONAR and DOES 1-25,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C-04-04632 TEH 

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER

EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANTS

TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND

AMENDED COMPLAINT

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rules 6(b) and Northern District Local

Rule 6-1 and 6-2, plaintiff and defendants hereby stipulate and agree that defendants shall have

an additional 10 court days, to December 2, 2005, in which to respond to the second amended

complaint on file in this action. Such extension is necessary for defendants’ to prepare an

appropriate response to the detailed allegations contained in the second amended complaint.

Case 3:04-cv-04632-SI Document 49 Filed 11/21/05 Page 1 of 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

Law Off ices

McInerney &

Dillon, P.C.

Oakland, California STIPULATION/PROPOSED ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT 2

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: November 18, 2005 McINERNEY & DILLON, P.C.

By: /s/ LeCarie S. Whitfield 

LeCarie S. Whitfield

Attorneys for defendants

Dated: November 18, 2005 SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY LLP

By: /s/ Eduardo G. Roy 

Eduardo G. Roy

Attorneys for plaintiff

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ______________________________

Honorable Susan Ilston

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 Nov. 21, 2005

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

Judge Susan Illston

Case 3:04-cv-04632-SI Document 49 Filed 11/21/05 Page 2 of 2