Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01360/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01360-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Joseph F. Frankl
Petitioner
United Site Services of California, Inc.
Respondent

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH F. FRANKL, Regional Director 

of Region 20 of the National Labor 

Relations Board, for and on behalf of the 

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS 

BOARD,

Petitioner,

v.

UNITED SITE SERVICES OF 

CALIFORNIA, INC.,

Respondent.

No. 2:15-CV-01360-TLN-CKD

ORDER OF THE COURT IN RESPONSE 

TO PARTIES’ STIPULATION

The Court is in receipt of the parties’ Stipulation and Proposed Order for Relief from 

Minute Order and Page Limit Requirements. (ECF No. 7.) Within such stipulation, the parties:

STIPULATE and AGREE that Petitioner be relieved of this 

Honorable Court’s June 26, 2015, Minute Order, (ECF Docket No. 

6), requiring re-filing of his Memorandum of Points and Authorities 

in Support of Petition for Injunction Under Section 10(j) of the 

National Labor Relations Act [29 U.S.C. 15 §160(j)] (Docket No. 

3), and that both Parties be relieved of the page limitations set forth 

in the Minute Order and in the Court’s Order Requiring Joint Status 

Report.

(ECF No. 7 at 1.) However, the parties do not have the authority to agree to overrule this Court’s 

orders or filing requirements and would do well to remember such in the future. The parties do

Case 2:15-cv-01360-TLN-CKD Document 11 Filed 07/06/15 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

2

correctly note within their stipulation that the Court’s Local Rules state that a Petitioner shall file 

a Memorandum of Points and Authorities simultaneously with its Petition for Injunction and 

evidence supporting the same. (ECF No. 7 at ¶ 2 (citing See Local Rule 231(d)(2)).) The Local 

Rules do not anticipate a petitioner filing an eighteen page petition that contains factual and legal 

arguments in addition to a fifty-five page memorandum of points and authorities. 

The Court is cognizant that the parties were not aware of which district court judge this 

matter would be assigned at the time of filing. However, seventy-three pages of briefing in 

addition to four hundred and twelve (412) pages of exhibits is excessive by any judge’s standards. 

(See ECF Nos. 1-1; 3-1–3-6.) As such, the Court orders as follows:

1. Petitioner is hereby ordered to refile a memorandum of points and authorities, in 

which the briefing is not to exceed thirty (30) pages and to re-notice the motion on an appropriate 

civil law and motion hearing date in accordance with this Court’s guidelines. Any supporting 

exhibits shall be refiled with Petitioner’s briefing.

2. Respondent shall file the necessary opposition not to exceed thirty (30) pages in 

accordance with this Court’s guidelines.

3. Petitioner’s reply briefing shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 6, 2015

Case 2:15-cv-01360-TLN-CKD Document 11 Filed 07/06/15 Page 2 of 2