Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00577/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00577-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
California Department of Motor Vehicles
Defendant
California Highway Patrol
Defendant
G.L. Fief
Defendant
Greg Makel
Defendant
Mark McAfee
Plaintiff
Salcido
Defendant
State of California
Defendant
G. Verdugo
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

Stipulation and Order to Extend Time

to Respond to Complaint

1

EDMUND G. BROWN JR.

Attorney General of the State of California

ALBERTO L. GONZALEZ

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

JEFFREY R. VINCENT, State Bar No. 161013

Deputy Attorney General

1300 I Street, Suite 125

P.O. Box 944255

Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Telephone: (916) 324-5492

Fax: (916) 322-8288

Email: Jeffrey.Vincent@doj.ca.gov

Attorneys for Defendants State of California by and

through the Department of Motor Vehicles, CHP Officer

D. Salcido, CHP Officer Gregory Makel, CHP Captain

G. Fief, and DMV Hearing Officer G. Verdugo 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK MCAFEE,

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA

HIGHWAY PATROL, CHP OFFICER

GREG MAKEL, CHP OFFICER

SALCIDO, CHP CAPT. G.L. FIEF,

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

MOTOR VEHICLES, HEARING

OFFICER G. VERDUGO, and DOES 1

through 10, inclusive,

Defendants.

1:07-CV-00577-OWW-NEW

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO

EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER

RECITALS

1. On May 29, defendant State of California by and through its Department of Motor

Vehicles (“DMV”), DMV Hearing Officer George Verdugo, California Highway Patrol (“CHP”)

Officer David Salcido, and CHP Captain Gary Fief filed a motion pursuant to Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) to dismiss the action or claims in the action. Hearing on that is

scheduled on July 2, 2007.

Case 1:07-cv-00577-OWW -GSA Document 13 Filed 06/19/07 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

Stipulation and Order to Extend Time

to Respond to Complaint

2

2. On June 13, 2007, defendant CHP Officer Gregory Makel was served with plaintiff's

second amended complaint in this action. 

3. Claims against Officer Makel arise from the same facts and are base on the same legal

theories as those alleged against defendant Salcido.

4. Officer Makel's response would be due on July 3, 2007. 

5. In order to avoid an unnecessary and redundant motion to dismiss the parties stipulate

as follows:

STIPULATION

1. Officer Makel may timely respond to the Second Amended Complaint within the time

specified by the court for the answer to be filed on behalf of Officer Salcido following the

hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss or within 10 days after an order is entered on the

pending motion to dismiss - which ever is later.

2. The court's ruling and order on the motion to dismiss will apply to the claims against

Officer Makel to the same extent as applied to Officer Salcido.

Dated: June 18, 2007 EDMUND G. BROWN JR.

Attorney General of the State of California

ALBERTO L. GONZÁLEZ

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

/s/ Jeff R. Vincent 

JEFF R. VINCENT

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendants State of California by and through the

Department of Motor Vehicles, CHP Officer D. Salcido, CHP Officer

Gregory Makel, CHP Captain G. Fief, and DMV Hearing Officer G.

Verdugo

Dated: June 18, 2007

/s/ Bruce W. Nickerson 

BRUCE W. NICKERSON 

Attorney for Plaintiff Mark McAfee

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 19, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00577-OWW -GSA Document 13 Filed 06/19/07 Page 2 of 2