STIPULATION TO CONTINUE INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; DECLARATION OF RYAN MARCROFT IN SUPPORT and (Proposed) Order filed by Jacob A Appelsmith, Edmund Brown, Jr, William Haraf, Kamala Harris, Traci Stevens, Robert Venchiarutti. (Marcroft, Ryan) (Filed on 5/8/2012) Modified on 5/8/2012 (bw, COURT STAFF).
No tags have been applied so far. Sign in to add some.
Page 1 Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page1 of 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
KAMALA D. HARRIS
Attorney General of California
PETER K. SOUTHWORTH
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
RYAN MARCROFT
Deputy Attorney General
State Bar No. 230952
1300 I Street, Suite 125
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
Telephone: (916) 323-5313
Fax: (916) 324-8835
E-mail: Ryan.Marcroft@doj.ca.gov
Attorneys for All Defendants
·
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
SAN JOSE DIVISION
12
13
14
THINK COMPUTER CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
15
16
17
v.
25
ROBERT VENCHIARUTTI, in his official
capacity as Deputy Commissioner of the
California Department of Financial
Institutions; TEVEIA R. BARNES, in her
official capacity as Commissioner of the
California Department of Financial
Institutions; BRIAN P. KELLY, in his
official capacity as Acting Secretary of the
California Business, Transportation and
Housing Agency; JACOB A.
APPELSMITH, in his official capacity as
Senior Advisor to the Governor of the State
of California; EDMUND G. BROWN, JR.,
in his official capacity as Governor of the
State of California; and KAMALA
HARRIS, in her official capacity as
Attorney General of the State of California,
26
Defendants.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
5:11-cv-05496-HRL
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE INITIAL
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND[PROPOSED]ORDER;
DECLARATION OF RYAN MARCROFT
IN SUPPORT
Courtroom:
Judge:
Trial Date:
Action Filed:
2
The Honorable Howard R. Lloyd
Not Set
·
November 14, 2011
27
28
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Management Conference (5:11-cv-05496-HRL)Page 2 Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page2 of 5
1
. Plaintiff THINK COMPUTER CORPORATION and Defendants ROBERT
2
VENCHIARUTTI, in his official capacity as Deputy Commissioner of the California Department
3
of Financial Institutions, TEVEIA R. BARNES, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the
4
California Department of Financial Institutions, BRIAN P. KELLY, in his official capacity as
5
Acting Secretary of the California Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, JACOB A.
6
APPELSMITH, in his official capacity as Senior Advisor to the Governor of the State of
7
California, EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., in his official capacity as Governor of the State of
8
California, and KAMALA HARRIS, in her official capacity as Attorney General of the State of
9
California (collectively, the "State Defendants") HEREBY STIPULATE pursuant to Local
10 Rule 6-2 to request continuance of the initial Case Management Conference (CMC) and its
11
associated deadlines. The parties suggest that the CMC, presently scheduled for May 29, 2012,
12
should be continued until the first expedited and available date for the Court to hold such CMC
13
after the Court issues its written ruling on the defendants' Motion to Dismiss the First Amended
14
Complaint. The associated deadlines should be continued accordingly.
15
Dated: May 8, 2012
Respectfully Submitted,
16
KAMALA D. HARRIS .
17
PETER K. SOUTHWORTH
Attorney General of California
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
18
19
20
Is/ Ryan Marcroft
RYAN MARCROFT
21
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for All Defendants
22
23
24
Is/ Michael Brooks Carroll
25
Law Offices of Michael Brooks Carroll
Attorneys for Plaintiff
MICHAEL BROOKS CARROLL, ESQ.
26
_j
27
Ill
28
Ill
1
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Management Conference (5:11-cv-05496-HRL)Page 3 Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page3 of 5
1
Pursuant to stipulation, so ordered. The Case Management Conference is continued to a
2
date to be set by the Court contemporaneous with its written ruling on the State
3
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 24). All related deadlines are adjusted
4
accordingly.
5
6
7
Dated: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Howard R. Lloyd
United States Magistrate Judge
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Ma:nagernent Conference (5: 11-cv-05496-HRL)Page 4 Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page4 of 5
1
DECLARATION OF RYAN MARCROFT
2
3
I, Ryan Marcroft, declare as follows:
4
1.
I ani a Deputy Attorney General and counsel of record for the State Defendants: I
5
am submitting this declaration pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 in support of the parties' Stipulation to
6
Continue Initial
7
2.
Cas~
Management Conference.
The following time modifications were previously made concerning the initial
8
CMC. On January 3, 2012, the State Defendants filed an unopposed motion for administrative
9
reliefto continue the CMC from January 10 to January 31,2012, and to continue its associated
10
deadlines. (Docket No. 13 at 2.) The Court granted the motion. (Docket No. 14.) Then, on
11
January 12, 2012, the parties jointly stipulated to extend the State Defendants' time to answer or
12
otherwise respond to the initial complaint to January 23, 2012, and the Court approved the
13
stipulation. (Docket No. 18.) The Court also sua sponte continued the CMC to February 28,
14
2012. (Id.) On January 23, 2012, the parties stipulated that the Plaintiff would file an amended
15
complaint by January 31, 2012. The Court approved this stipulation and sua sponte continued the
16
CMC to April17, 2012. (Docket 22 at. 3.)
17
The Plaintiff filed its First Amended Complaint on January 31, 2012. (Docket No. 23.)
18
The State Defendants filed their motion to dismiss on February 14, 2012 (Docket No. 24), the
19
Plaintiff filed its response and opposition on February 28,2012 (Docket No. 30), and the State
20
Defendants filed their reply on March 6, 2012 (Docket No. 31). Thereafter, this Court sua sponte
21
continued the CMC to its present date, May 29, 2012, and adjusted all related deadlines
22
accordingly. (Docket No. 32.)
23
.The Plaintiff moved to shorten the time to the CMC. (Docket No. 33.) The Court denied
24
the motion in light of the State Defendants' pending motion to dismiss. (Docket No. 35 at 1.)
25
Following the hearing on the defendants' motion, the Court indicated that it would issue a written
26
ruling on the motion. (Docket No. 40.)
27
28
3.
In view of the State Defendants' pending motion to dismiss, the parties request
that the Court continue the CMC, presently scheduled for May 29, 2012, to a date to be set by the
3
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Management Conference (5:11-cv-05496-HRL)Page 5 Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page5 of 5
1
Court contemporaneous with its written ruling on the defendants' motion to dismiss. The parties
2
further request that the Court adjust all related deadlines accordingly.
3
4.
Extending the CMC and its associated deadlines until after the Court has ruled on
4
the State Defendants' motion to dismiss would have no impact on the current case schedule apart
5
from the timing of the CMC itself and .its associated deadlines.
6
I declare that the foregoing is true and correct under penalty of perjury under the laws of
7
the United States of America.·
8
Date: May 8, 2012
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Management Conference (5:11-cv-05496-HRL)
PDF Page 1
PlainSite Cover Page
PDF Page 2
Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page1 of 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
KAMALA D. HARRIS
Attorney General of California
PETER K. SOUTHWORTH
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
RYAN MARCROFT
Deputy Attorney General
State Bar No. 230952
1300 I Street, Suite 125
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
Telephone: (916) 323-5313
Fax: (916) 324-8835
E-mail: Ryan.Marcroft@doj.ca.gov
Attorneys for All Defendants
·
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
SAN JOSE DIVISION
12
13
14
THINK COMPUTER CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
15
16
17
v.
25
ROBERT VENCHIARUTTI, in his official
capacity as Deputy Commissioner of the
California Department of Financial
Institutions; TEVEIA R. BARNES, in her
official capacity as Commissioner of the
California Department of Financial
Institutions; BRIAN P. KELLY, in his
official capacity as Acting Secretary of the
California Business, Transportation and
Housing Agency; JACOB A.
APPELSMITH, in his official capacity as
Senior Advisor to the Governor of the State
of California; EDMUND G. BROWN, JR.,
in his official capacity as Governor of the
State of California; and KAMALA
HARRIS, in her official capacity as
Attorney General of the State of California,
26
Defendants.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
5:11-cv-05496-HRL
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE INITIAL
CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
AND[PROPOSED]ORDER;
DECLARATION OF RYAN MARCROFT
IN SUPPORT
Courtroom:
Judge:
Trial Date:
Action Filed:
2
The Honorable Howard R. Lloyd
Not Set
·
November 14, 2011
27
28
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Management Conference (5:11-cv-05496-HRL)
PDF Page 3
Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page2 of 5
1
. Plaintiff THINK COMPUTER CORPORATION and Defendants ROBERT
2
VENCHIARUTTI, in his official capacity as Deputy Commissioner of the California Department
3
of Financial Institutions, TEVEIA R. BARNES, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the
4
California Department of Financial Institutions, BRIAN P. KELLY, in his official capacity as
5
Acting Secretary of the California Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, JACOB A.
6
APPELSMITH, in his official capacity as Senior Advisor to the Governor of the State of
7
California, EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., in his official capacity as Governor of the State of
8
California, and KAMALA HARRIS, in her official capacity as Attorney General of the State of
9
California (collectively, the "State Defendants") HEREBY STIPULATE pursuant to Local
10
Rule 6-2 to request continuance of the initial Case Management Conference (CMC) and its
11
associated deadlines. The parties suggest that the CMC, presently scheduled for May 29, 2012,
12
should be continued until the first expedited and available date for the Court to hold such CMC
13
after the Court issues its written ruling on the defendants' Motion to Dismiss the First Amended
14
Complaint. The associated deadlines should be continued accordingly.
15
Dated: May 8, 2012
Respectfully Submitted,
16
KAMALA D. HARRIS .
17
PETER K. SOUTHWORTH
Attorney General of California
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
18
19
20
Is/ Ryan Marcroft
RYAN MARCROFT
21
Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for All Defendants
22
23
24
Is/ Michael Brooks Carroll
25
Law Offices of Michael Brooks Carroll
Attorneys for Plaintiff
MICHAEL BROOKS CARROLL, ESQ.
26
_j
27
Ill
28
Ill
1
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Management Conference (5:11-cv-05496-HRL)
PDF Page 4
Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page3 of 5
1
Pursuant to stipulation, so ordered. The Case Management Conference is continued to a
2
date to be set by the Court contemporaneous with its written ruling on the State
3
Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 24). All related deadlines are adjusted
4
accordingly.
5
6
7
Dated: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Howard R. Lloyd
United States Magistrate Judge
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Ma:nagernent Conference (5: 11-cv-05496-HRL)
PDF Page 5
Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page4 of 5
1
DECLARATION OF RYAN MARCROFT
2
3
I, Ryan Marcroft, declare as follows:
4
1.
I ani a Deputy Attorney General and counsel of record for the State Defendants: I
5
am submitting this declaration pursuant to Local Rule 6-2 in support of the parties' Stipulation to
6
Continue Initial
7
2.
Cas~
Management Conference.
The following time modifications were previously made concerning the initial
8
CMC. On January 3, 2012, the State Defendants filed an unopposed motion for administrative
9
reliefto continue the CMC from January 10 to January 31,2012, and to continue its associated
10
deadlines. (Docket No. 13 at 2.) The Court granted the motion. (Docket No. 14.) Then, on
11
January 12, 2012, the parties jointly stipulated to extend the State Defendants' time to answer or
12
otherwise respond to the initial complaint to January 23, 2012, and the Court approved the
13
stipulation. (Docket No. 18.) The Court also sua sponte continued the CMC to February 28,
14
2012. (Id.) On January 23, 2012, the parties stipulated that the Plaintiff would file an amended
15
complaint by January 31, 2012. The Court approved this stipulation and sua sponte continued the
16
CMC to April17, 2012. (Docket 22 at. 3.)
17
The Plaintiff filed its First Amended Complaint on January 31, 2012. (Docket No. 23.)
18
The State Defendants filed their motion to dismiss on February 14, 2012 (Docket No. 24), the
19
Plaintiff filed its response and opposition on February 28,2012 (Docket No. 30), and the State
20
Defendants filed their reply on March 6, 2012 (Docket No. 31). Thereafter, this Court sua sponte
21
continued the CMC to its present date, May 29, 2012, and adjusted all related deadlines
22
accordingly. (Docket No. 32.)
23
.The Plaintiff moved to shorten the time to the CMC. (Docket No. 33.) The Court denied
24
the motion in light of the State Defendants' pending motion to dismiss. (Docket No. 35 at 1.)
25
Following the hearing on the defendants' motion, the Court indicated that it would issue a written
26
ruling on the motion. (Docket No. 40.)
27
28
3.
In view of the State Defendants' pending motion to dismiss, the parties request
that the Court continue the CMC, presently scheduled for May 29, 2012, to a date to be set by the
3
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Management Conference (5:11-cv-05496-HRL)
PDF Page 6
Case5:11-cv-05496-HRL Document41 Filed05/08/12 Page5 of 5
1
Court contemporaneous with its written ruling on the defendants' motion to dismiss. The parties
2
further request that the Court adjust all related deadlines accordingly.
3
4.
Extending the CMC and its associated deadlines until after the Court has ruled on
4
the State Defendants' motion to dismiss would have no impact on the current case schedule apart
5
from the timing of the CMC itself and .its associated deadlines.
6
I declare that the foregoing is true and correct under penalty of perjury under the laws of
7
the United States of America.·
8
Date: May 8, 2012
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue Case Management Conference (5:11-cv-05496-HRL)
Third party AI contribution in government documents
Possible
Document content is reproduced directly from government sources. Think Computer Corporation does not generate, alter, annotate, or summarize documents using artificial intelligence. Some filings in our database may themselves contain AI-generated content submitted by third parties to government agencies.
Back to 
