Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02647/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02647-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ruth Coleman
Defendant
Deltakeeper
Plaintiff
Waterkeepers Northern California
Plaintiff

Document Text:

Stipulation to extend time to answer, conduct status conf. 1 Case No. CIV. S-04-2647 GEB KJM 

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

Layne Friedrich (Bar No. 195431) 

Daniel Cooper (Bar No. 153576) 

LAWYERS FOR CLEAN WATER, INC. 

1004 O’Reilly Avenue 

San Francisco, California 94129 

Telephone: (415) 561-2222 

Facsimile: (415) 561-2223 

Email: layne@lawyersforcleanwater.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

WATERKEEEPERS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 

d.b.a. DELTAKEEPER 

Tim La Franchi (State Bar No. 105174) 

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION 

1416 9th Street 

Sacramento, California 95814 

Telephone: (916) 653 6884 

Facsimile: (916) 653-1819 

Email:tlafr@parks.ca.gov

Attorneys for Defendant 

RUTH COLEMAN, in her official capacity as 

DIRECTOR of CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT 

OF PARKS AND RECREATION 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

WATERKEEPERS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, 

a non-profit corporation, d.b.a. 

DELTAKEEPER 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

RUTH COLEMAN, in her official capacity as 

DIRECTOR of CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

PARKS AND RECREATION, 

a state agency 

 Defendant. 

Civil Case No.: CIV. S-04-2647 GEB KJM 

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO 

ANSWER COMPLAINT AND CONDUCT 

STATUS CONFERENCE; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Honorable Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. 

Scheduling Conference: May 9, 2005 

 9:00 a.m. 

 Courtroom 10 

Case 2:04-cv-02647-KJM Document 7 Filed 04/20/05 Page 1 of 3
Stipulation to extend time to answer, conduct status conf. 2 Case No. CIV. S-04-2647 GEB KJM 

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

WHEREAS, on October 12, 2004, Plaintiffs issued a sixty day notice of its intent to file suit 

alleging violations of the federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq. to Defendant; 

WHEREAS, on December 14, 2005, the parties conducted a meeting with the objective of 

achieving Defendant’s compliance and settling the action without litigation; 

WHEREAS, to facilitate the exchange of information and possible settlement, as well as save 

the parties’ resources, Plaintiffs did not immediately serve the complaint on Defendant; 

WHEREAS, on December 15, 2004, Plaintiff filed its complaint in federal court. 

WHEREAS, after the December meeting, the parties continued discussions and exchanged 

information regarding the allegations in Plaintiff’s complaint; 

WHEREAS, Defendant was served on April 1, 2005, which would have required Defendant to 

respond to the complaint by April 21, 2005; 

WHEREAS, although Defendant requested representation by the Attorney General’s office in 

November 2004, on April 13, 2005, the Attorney General’s office informed Defendant that it could not 

represent Defendant due to a conflict of interest with the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The 

Attorney General therefore authorized Defendant to seek outside counsel for this litigation. 

WHEREAS, on April 14, 2005, counsel for Plaintiff and counsel for Defendant discussed the 

case status and these developments. Counsel for Defendant requested additional time to answer the 

complaint so that it could secure outside counsel. Counsel for Plaintiff stated that it has no objection to 

stipulating to give Defendant additional time to answer the complaint. Counsel for the parties also 

discussed the necessity of extending the time to conduct the status conference, currently scheduled for 

May 9, 2005, and the dates related to that conference. 

WHEREAS, the parties agreed on a mutually convenient schedule for the filing of Defendant’s 

answer, subject to the Court's approval, as well as a timeline for the parties’ filing of the joint status 

report, and scheduling conference. 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the undersigned attorneys for 

the parties, subject to the Court's approval, that the following schedule shall govern the time for 

Defendant to answer the complaint, to submit the Joint Report and for the Scheduling Conference: 

Case 2:04-cv-02647-KJM Document 7 Filed 04/20/05 Page 2 of 3
Stipulation to extend time to answer, conduct status conf. 3 Case No. CIV. S-04-2647 GEB KJM 

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

Defendant’s answer to the complaint.........................................May 11, 2005 

Joint Status Report ..............................................................May 20, 2005 

Scheduling Conference ..........................................................June 6, 2005 

Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: April 19, 2005. 

By: /s/ Layne Friedrich, Esquire

Layne Friedrich 

Lawyers for Clean Water 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Dated: April 19, 2005. 

By: /s/ Tim La Franchi, Esquire 

(as authorized on April 19, 2005) 

Tim La Franchi 

Department of Parks and Recreation 

Attorneys for Defendant 

The Court adopts the following schedule proposed by the parties: 

Defendant’s answer to the complaint.........................................May 11, 2005 

Joint Status Report ..............................................................May 20, 2005 

Scheduling Conference .........................................................June 6, 2005 

IT IS SO ORDERED: 

DATED: April 20, 2005 

 /s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr. 

 GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. 

 United States District Judge 

Case 2:04-cv-02647-KJM Document 7 Filed 04/20/05 Page 3 of 3