Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-02513/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-02513-10/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Citizens for Free Speech, LLC
Plaintiff
County of Alameda
Defendant
Michael Shaw
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

Stipulation re Briefing Schedule; Declaration in Support; Order

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02513-CRB

MATTHEW D. ZINN (State Bar No. 214587)

WINTER KING (State Bar No. 237958)

SARA A. CLARK (State Bar No. 273600

SHUTE, MIHALY & WEINBERGER LLP

396 Hayes Street

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 552-7272

Facsimile: (415) 552-5816

Zinn@smwlaw.com

King@smwlaw.com

Clark@smwlaw.com

Attorneys for Defendant County of Alameda

Joshua R. Furman (State Bar No. 225461)

JOSHUA R. FURMAN LAW 

CORPORATION

14724 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 509

Sherman Oaks, California 91403

Telephone: (818) 646-4300

Facsimile: (818) 646-4301

jrf@furmanlawyers.com

Attorney for Plaintiffs Citizens for Free 

Speech, LLC and Michael Shaw

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

 

CITIZENS FOR FREE SPEECH,

LLC; MICHAEL SHAW,

Plaintiffs,

v.

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA,

Defendant.

Case No. 3:14-cv-02513-CRB

Stipulation re Briefing Schedule for 

Motion for Reconsideration and to 

Dissolve Preliminary Injunction; 

Declaration of Matthew Zinn in 

Support; Order

Case 3:14-cv-02513-CRB Document 122 Filed 10/27/16 Page 1 of 5
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

1

Stipulation re Briefing Schedule; Declaration in Support; Order

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02513-CRB

On October 14, 2016, the Court held a status conference to discuss disposition 

of this case. Defendant County of Alameda sought leave to file a motion for 

reconsideration of the Court’s July 8 summary judgment order pursuant to Local 

Rule 7-9, which the Court granted, based on the County’s recent action to amend 

the Zoning Ordinance at issue in this case. The Court also encouraged the County 

to file a motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction. By minute order, the Court 

set a hearing for November 18, 2016. 

The County intends to file a joint motion to dissolve the preliminary 

injunction and for reconsideration of the July 8 summary judgment order. Under 

Local Rule 6-2, the Parties hereby stipulate to establish a briefing schedule for the 

motion that varies from the time permitted under Local Rules 7-2 and 7-3. The 

grounds for the stipulation follow, and are likewise set forth in the accompanying 

Declaration of Matthew D. Zinn. 

The timing of the status conference and the motion hearing render it 

impossible for the parties to comply with Local Rule 7-2 (requiring opening motion 

and supporting papers to be submitted at least 35 days prior to hearing). 

Consequently, counsel for the parties have met and conferred regarding a briefing 

schedule for the motion. The parties stipulate to, and request that the Court order,

the following schedule: 

Moving Papers: October 26, 2016

Opposition Brief: November 8, 2016

Reply Brief: November 14, 2016

Hearing: November 29, 2016, 2:00 p.m. 

The parties are mindful that the proposed schedule would reduce the Court’s 

time for consideration of the motion prior to the hearing. However, given the early 

date set for the hearing, the parties have been unable to identify a schedule that 

allows each side adequate time to brief the motion. 

Case 3:14-cv-02513-CRB Document 122 Filed 10/27/16 Page 2 of 5
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

Stipulation re Briefing Schedule; Declaration in Support; Order

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02513-CRB

Concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the 

other Signatories.

DATED: October 19, 2016 SHUTE, MIHALY & WEINBERGER LLP

By: /s/

MATTHEW D. ZINN

Attorneys for Defendant County of 

Alameda

DATED: October 19, 2016 JOSHUA R. FURMAN LAW CORPORATION

By: /s/ (Authorized on 10/19/16)

JOSHUA R. FURMAN

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Citizens for Free 

Speech, LLC and Michael Shaw

Declaration of Matthew D. Zinn 

I, Matthew D. Zinn, declare as follows:

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

partner at Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP, attorneys for Defendant County of 

Alameda. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein, except as to those 

stated on information and belief, and as to those, I am informed and believe them 

to be true. If called as a witness, I could and would competently testify to the 

matters stated herein.

2. On October 14, 2016, the Court held a status conference to discuss 

disposition of this case. Defendant County of Alameda sought leave to file a motion 

for reconsideration of the Court’s July 8 summary judgment order pursuant to 

Local Rule 7-9, which the Court granted, based on the County’s recent action to 

Case 3:14-cv-02513-CRB Document 122 Filed 10/27/16 Page 3 of 5
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

3

Stipulation re Briefing Schedule; Declaration in Support; Order

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02513-CRB

amend the Zoning Ordinance at issue in this case. The Court also encouraged the 

County to motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction. By minute order, the 

Court set a hearing for November 18, 2016. 

3. The County intends to file a joint motion to dissolve the preliminary 

injunction and for reconsideration of the July 8 summary judgment order. The 

timing of the status conference and the motion hearing render it impossible for the 

parties to comply with Local Rule 7-2 (requiring opening motion and supporting 

papers to be submitted at least 35 days prior to hearing). Consequently, I met and 

conferred with Joshua Furman, counsel for Plaintiffs, to discuss an alternate 

briefing schedule. 

4. On information and belief, prior counsel for Defendant submitted a 

motion to enlarge time to submit a proposed preliminary injunction, which was 

granted by this Court on August 11, 2014. 

5. On information and belief, the parties submitted a stipulation and 

proposed order to change the briefing schedule on their cross-motions for summary 

judgment, which was granted on April 18, 2016. 

6. To my knowledge, no other time modifications in this case have 

occurred.

7. I do not believe that the requested time modification would have a 

material effect on the schedule for this case. Counsel for the parties have worked 

cooperatively on a briefing schedule in light of the November 18, 2016 hearing date 

set by the Court. In addition, the parties are willing to reset the hearing date if 

necessary to allow the Court additional time to review the motion papers. 

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of 

America that the foregoing is true and correct.

Case 3:14-cv-02513-CRB Document 122 Filed 10/27/16 Page 4 of 5
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

4

Stipulation re Briefing Schedule; Declaration in Support; Order

CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02513-CRB

Executed October 19, 2016, at San Francisco, California.

/s/

Matthew D. Zinn

 

Order 

The Court has reviewed the parties’ stipulation to set a briefing schedule for 

Defendants’ motion for reconsideration and to dissolve the preliminary injunction 

and the accompanying declaration. For good cause shown, the Court hereby orders 

the following schedule: 

Moving Papers: October 26, 2016

Opposition Brief: November 8, 2016

Reply Brief: November 14, 2016 

Hearing: November 29, 2016, 2:00 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 27, 2016

Hon. Charles R. Breyer

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-02513-CRB Document 122 Filed 10/27/16 Page 5 of 5