Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01846/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01846-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City and County of San Francisco
Defendant
Estate of Amilcar Perez Lopez
Plaintiff
Margarita Lopez Perez
Plaintiff
Juan Perez
Plaintiff
Eric Reboli
Defendant
San Francisco Police Department
Defendant
Greg Suhr
Defendant
Craig Tiffe
Defendant

Document Text:

Stip Re Time to Respond to Complaint & Cont. CMC

CASE NO. CV-15-01846 HSG

g:\hsgall\_cv\2014\2014_02855_helmantoler_v_city_of_concord\1

5-1846.docx

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

DENNIS J. HERRERA, City Attorney

CHERYL ADAMS, State Bar #164194

Chief Trial Deputy

PETER J. KEITH, State Bar #206482

Deputy City Attorney

1390 Market Street, 6th Floor

San Francisco, California 94102-5408

Telephone: (415) 554-3908

Facsimile: (415) 554-3837

E-Mail: peter.keith@sfgov.org

Attorneys for Defendants

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (including

SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT),

GREG SUHR, CRAIG TIFFE, and ERIC REBOLI

ARNOLDO CASILLAS, ESQ., State Bar #158519

DENISSE O. GASTÉLUM, ESQ., State Bar #282771

CASILLAS, MORENO & ASSOCIATES

3500 W. Beverly Blvd.

Montebello, CA 90640

Telephone: (323) 725-0917

Facsimile: (323) 725-0350

E-Mail: acasillas@morenolawoffices.com

(Additional Counsel for Plaintiffs on following page)

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

ESTATE OF AMILCAR PEREZ LOPEZ, JUAN PEREZ, 

MARGARITA LOPEZ PEREZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ESTATE OF AMILCAR PEREZ LOPEZ, by 

and through successors in interest, JUAN 

PEREZ and MARGARITA LOPEZ PEREZ;

JUAN PEREZ, individually; MARGARITA 

LOPEZ PEREZ, individually,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

CHIEF OF POLICE GREG SUHR; CITY 

AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO; SAN 

FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT; 

OFFICER CRAIG TIFFE (Badge No. 1312); 

OFFICER ERIC REBOLI (Badge No. 1651), 

and DOES 1 to 10,

Defendants.

Case No. CV15-01846-HSG

STIPULATION WAIVING SERVICE OF 

SUMMONS, EXTENDING TIME TO 

RESPOND TO COMPLAINT, AND 

CONTINUING INITIAL CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE FROM JULY 

21, 2015 TO SEPTEMBER 8, 2015;

DECLARATION IN SUPPORT;

ORDER

Judge: Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam

Place: 450 Golden Gate Avenue

Courtroom 15 - 18th

San Francisco, CA

Case 4:15-cv-01846-HSG Document 12 Filed 06/24/15 Page 1 of 5
Stip Re Time to Respond to Complaint & Cont. CMC

CASE NO. CV-15-01846 HSG

g:\hsgall\_cv\2014\2014_02855_helmantoler_v_city_of_concord\1

5-1846.docx

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

Additional Counsel for Plaintiffs:

JONATHAN D. MELROD, ESQ., State Bar #136441

1313 Scheibel Lane

Sebastopol, CA 954 72

Telephone: (415) 806-0154

E-Mail: jonathan4536@sbcglobal.net

WILLIAM M. SIMPICH, JR., ESQ., State Bar #106672

1736 Franklin Street, 10th Floor

Oakland, CA 94612

Telephone: (510) 444-0226

E-Mail: bsimpich@gmail.com

Case 4:15-cv-01846-HSG Document 12 Filed 06/24/15 Page 2 of 5
Stip Re Time to Respond to Complaint & Cont. CMC

CASE NO. CV-15-01846 HSG

1 g:\hsgall\_cv\2014\2014_02855_helmantoler_v_city_of_concord\1

5-1846.docx

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

The parties to this action, Plaintiffs ESTATE OF AMILCAR PEREZ LOPEZ, JUAN PEREZ, 

MARGARITA LOPEZ PEREZ and Defendants GREG SUHR, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO (also sued as SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT), CRAIG TIFFE, and ERIC 

REBOLI, through their respective counsel, stipulate as follows:

1. Waiver of service of summons by all unserved defendants. Defendants CRAIG 

TIFFE and ERIC REBOLI waive service of summons pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, 

Rule 4(d), as if the request for waiver were mailed on June 18, 2015, such that the due date for a 

response to the Complaint on behalf of each of them is due on August 17, 2015.

2. Extension of time to respond to Complaint for the previously served defendants, to 

August 17, 2015. Under Northern District Civil Local Rule No. 6-1, the time to file a response to the 

Complaint on behalf of defendants CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (also sued as the 

SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT) and GREG SUHR is extended to and including August 

17, 2015. That is the same date that a response is due from the remaining defendants (CRAIG TIFFE 

and ERIC REBOLI), who have agreed to waive service of summons. This extension will not alter any 

event or deadline already fixed by Court order and it does not involve papers required to be filed or 

lodged with the Court other than an initial response to the Complaint; however, as discussed below, 

the parties have made a stipulated request to continue the case management conference for reasons that 

include permitting the served defendants, as well as the defendants who have agreed to waive service 

of summons, sufficient time to respond to the Complaint.

3. Continuance of initial case management conference to September 8, 2015, at 2:00 

p.m. The current initial case management conference is set for July 21, 2015. The parties request an 

order continuing the initial case management conference to Tuesday September 8, 2015, at 2:00 p.m., 

and likewise continuing the pre-case management conference deadlines based on the new case 

management conference date. Good cause exists for this extension as follows: (1) defense counsel 

will be on a pre-planned, prepaid vacation on the currently set date of July 21; and further, (2) the 

requested extension will allow all parties to appear in this action and will allow counsel sufficient

Case 4:15-cv-01846-HSG Document 12 Filed 06/24/15 Page 3 of 5
Stip Re Time to Respond to Complaint & Cont. CMC

CASE NO. CV-15-01846 HSG

2 g:\hsgall\_cv\2014\2014_02855_helmantoler_v_city_of_concord\1

5-1846.docx

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

time to meet and confer on the matters specified by the Federal Rules, Local Rules, and Standing 

Orders. There have been no previous requests for a continuance.

The parties respectfully request that the above stipulation be entered as the Court’s Order.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: June 23, 2015

DENNIS J. HERRERA

City Attorney

CHERYL ADAMS

Chief Trial Deputy

PETER J. KEITH

Deputy City Attorney

By: /s/ Peter J. Keith

PETER J. KEITH

Attorneys for Defendants

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (including

SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT),

GREG SUHR, CRAIG TIFFE, AND ERIC REBOLI

Dated: June 23, 2015

CASILLAS, MORENO & ASSOCIATES

By: ** /s/ Arnoldo Casillas

ARNOLDO CASILLAS, ESQ.

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

ESTATE OF AMILCAR PEREZ LOPEZ, JUAN 

PEREZ, MARGARITA LOPEZ PEREZ

**Pursuant to Civil L.R. 5-1(i)(3), the electronic 

signatory has obtained approval from this signatory.

DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF STIPULATED REQUEST FOR SCHEDULING ORDER 

I, Peter J. Keith declare as follows:

1. I am a Deputy City Attorney in the Office of the San Francisco City Attorney, counsel 

of record to Defendants GREG SUHR, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (also sued as 

SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT), CRAIG TIFFE, and ERIC REBOLI. I have personal 

Case 4:15-cv-01846-HSG Document 12 Filed 06/24/15 Page 4 of 5
Stip Re Time to Respond to Complaint & Cont. CMC

CASE NO. CV-15-01846 HSG

3 g:\hsgall\_cv\2014\2014_02855_helmantoler_v_city_of_concord\1

5-1846.docx

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

knowledge of the contents of this declaration, except where indicated otherwise, and I could and 

would testify competently thereto if called upon to do so. 

2. Good cause for continuance of case management conference. I have a pre-planned, 

prepaid vacation on the currently scheduled date of July 21. This vacation was scheduled and paid for 

before any defendants were served. In addition, an extension is sought until September 8, 2015 to 

allow all parties to appear in this action and to allow counsel sufficient time to meet and confer on the 

matters specified by the Federal Rules, Local Rules, and Standing Orders.

3. Previous time modifications. No previous time modifications have been requested.

4. Effect of the proposed schedule on the schedule for the case. The proposed schedule 

will result in postponement of the initial case management conference and the dates associated with it, 

but counsel do not expect the extension to affect the parties’ requested deadlines for discovery, 

motions, trial, or other matters. In addition, the parties have alreadly worked together to eliminate 

delay, as shown by the remaining unserved defendants’ agreement to waive service of summons so 

that all parties will be brought in to this action shortly. 

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true 

and correct. Executed June 23, 2015 at San Francisco, California.

/s/ Peter J. Keith 

PETER J. KEITH

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION AND GOOD CAUSE SHOWN,

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 6/24/2015 ______________________________________

THE HONORABLE HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:15-cv-01846-HSG Document 12 Filed 06/24/15 Page 5 of 5