(PC) Freeman v. Clark

Opinion

ROB BONTA, State Bar No. 202668 Attorney General of California TRACY S. HENDRICKSON, State Bar No. 155081 Supervising Deputy Attorney General JOSEPH R. WHEELER, State Bar No. 216721 Supervising Deputy Attorney General 1300 I Street, Suite 125 P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550 Telephone: (916) 210-7315 Fax: (916) 324-5205 E-mail: Joseph.Wheeler@doj.ca.gov Attorneys for Defendants K. Clark and C. Bell Greg W. Garrotto, State Bar #89542 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2000 Los Angeles, California 90067 Telephone (310) 229-9200 Fax: 310-229-9209 E-Mail: jjggarrotto@msn.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Leroy Freeman IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION LEROY FREEMAN, 1:21-cv-00611-NONE-JLT Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO VACATE AND RESET SCHEDULING v. CONFERENCE (Doc. 9) CLARK, et al.,

A scheduling conference in this case is currently set for July 12, 2021, and the parties are required to submit a joint scheduling report by July 5, 2021. (ECF No. 4.) Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and Local Rule 143, the parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, request that the scheduling conference and deadline for submitting a joint scheduling report be vacated and reset to sometime after a defendant has filed an answer in this action. A scheduling order may be modified only upon a showing of good cause and by leave of Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), 16(b)(4); see also, e.g., Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609. Good cause exists here because Defendants Clark and Bell, who are both being sued in their official capacities, have filed a motion to dismiss, asserting, among other things, Eleventh Amendment immunity. (ECF No. 7.) Until the Court rules on the motion to dismiss and the pleadings are settled, the parties cannot properly prepare an accurate joint scheduling report or effectively participate in a scheduling conference. / / / / / / / / / Based on the foregoing, the parties stipulate as follows: the scheduling conference currently set for July 12, 2021, and the deadline for the parties to submit a joint scheduling report, be vacated. The scheduling conference be reset to sometime after any defendant files an answer in this action. Dated: June 23, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

Attorney General of California Supervising Deputy Attorney General /s/ JOSEPH R. WHEELER JOSEPH R. WHEELER Supervising Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants K. Clark and C. Bell

Dated: June 23, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

LAW OFFICES OF GREG W. GARROTTO

/s/ Greg W. Garrotto 1

Greg W. Garrotto Attorneys for Plaintiff Leroy Freeman

ORDER Based upon the above stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, the scheduling conference set for July 12, 2021, is CONTINUED to October 25, 2021 at 8:30 a.m. A joint scheduling conference report shall be filed at least one week before.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 23, 2021 _ /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1 As authorized via e-mail on June 23, 2021.