Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-05176/USCOURTS-caed-1_00-cv-05176-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Louis Caldera
Defendant
California Army National Guard
Defendant
Venette Marriner
Plaintiff
Secretary of the Army
Defendant

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 For convenience, the named defendants will be collectively referred to as the “Army.” 1

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VENETTE MARRINER, CASE NO. CV F 00-5176 LJO

Plaintiff, ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE

APPLICATION TO SHORTEN TIME AND

vs. SANCTIONS MOTION

(Doc. 68, 70.)

CALIFORNIA ARMY NATIONAL

GUARD, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff Venette Marriner (“Ms. Marriner”) seeks on shorten time to strike defendant Secretary

of the Army Louis Caldera’s alternative motions to dismiss and to exclude evidence of what the Army 1

characterizes as administratively unexhausted employment discrimination claims. Ms. Marriner further

seeks to impose a $4,050 sanction on the Army and/or its counsel. The parties’ counsel agreed to

address Ms. Marriner’s ex parte application to shorten time and sanctions motion by a June 27, 2006

telephone conference with theCourt. Ms.Marriner appeared bytelephone by counsel Shelley G. Bryant,

W.J. Smith & Associates. The Army appeared by telephone by Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian W. Enos.

Ms. Marriner contends that pursuant to the operative scheduling order and F.R.Civ.P. 16, the

Army belatedly filed its alternative motions to dismiss and in limine. Ms. Marriner’s counsel notes that

their reliance on the March 31, 2006 motion filing deadline and ensuing press of business prevent them

to adequately oppose the Army’s alternative motions to dismiss and in limine based on the July 21, 2006

Case 1:00-cv-05176-LJO Document 76 Filed 06/27/06 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

hearing date set by the Army. The Army contends that the March 31, 2006 motion filing deadline does

not prevent it to challenge lack of this Court’s jurisdiction over claims which Ms. Marriner has not

administratively exhausted.

To address issues raised by Ms. Marriner’s sanctions motion and on the basis of good cause, this

Court RESETS the July 21, 2006 hearing on the Army’s motions to dismiss and in limine to August 1,

2006 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 8 (LJO). Ms. Marriner shall file and serve her opposition papers no

later than July 18, 2006. The Army shall file and serve its reply papers no later than July 25, 2006. This

Court further RESETS the July 31, 2006 pretrial conference to August 4, 2006 at 8:30 a.m. in

Department 8 (LJO). 

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 27, 2006 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

66h44d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:00-cv-05176-LJO Document 76 Filed 06/27/06 Page 2 of 2