International Franchise Association v. State of California

Opinion

INTERNATIONAL FRANCHISE Case No. 20-cv-02243-BAS-DEB ASSOCIATION, et al., ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ Plaintiffs, EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR v. LEAVE TO FILE NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., (ECF No. 27) Defendants.

On October 13, 2021, Plaintiffs moved ex parte to file a notice of the following supplemental authorities: Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. 20-1999, 2021 WL 3486175 (1st Cir. Aug. 9, 2021) and Ranchers Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of Am. v. Vilsack, 6 F.4th 983 (9th Cir. July 27, 2021). (ECF No. 27.) Under Civil Local Rule 83.3(g)(2), a party moving ex parte is required to file an affidavit or declaration showing that the party met and conferred with opposing counsel about the intent to file an ex parte motion, made a good faith effort to do so, or should be excused from the meet-and-confer obligation. Once an ex parte motion is filed, the opposing party has two court days to notify the Court with the intent to oppose the motion. Judge Bashant’s Standing Order for Civil Cases ¶ 6. “Ex parte applications that are not opposed within two Court days must be considered unopposed and may be granted on that ground.” Jd. Here, counsel for Plaintiffs filed a declaration stating that on October 4, 2021, and October 12, 2021, she met and conferred with counsel for Defendants about the intent to file the present ex parte application. (ECF No. 27 at 3.) Plaintiffs filed the present application on October 13, 2021. More than two court days have passed, and Defendants have not notified the Court of their intent to oppose the motion. As such, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ ex parte application to file notice of supplemental authorities as unopposed. (ECF No. 27.) / DATED: October 18, 2021 Cypilling Aioh tak United States District Judge _9.