Administrative Motion per Civil Local Rule 7-11, State of Michigan et al. v. DeVos, No. 3:20-cv-04478 (N.D. Cal.), Doc. 25 (July 17, 2020)

Summary

Plaintiffs' unopposed administrative motion under Civil Local Rule 7-11 in State of Michigan et al. v. DeVos, No. 3:20-cv-04478-SK, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Document 25, filed July 17, 2020. The motion asks to exceed the applicable page limits and to expedite the briefing schedule for plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which concerns the provision of equitable services to private school students using CARES Act funds. Plaintiffs request that the motion and the opposition not exceed 30 pages each and the reply not exceed 17 pages, with the opposition due no later than July 29 and the reply no later than August 3. The motion states that Defendants have indicated their agreement, and the signature block lists /s/ Garrett Lindsey.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Administrative Motion per Civil Local Rule 7-11, State of Michigan et al. v. DeVos, No. 3:20-cv-04478 (N.D. Cal.), Doc. 25 (July 17, 2020).” Original at storage.courtlistener.com. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/administrative-motion-per-civil-local-rule-7-11-state-of-michigan-et-a-3eed2c6a7c/, SHA-256 44a10bc60b1ba4a6831f07fca75e284f2ec727832e3d850f9fd13adfbfcc2771.

Full text

Case 3:20-cv-04478-SK Document 25 Filed 07/17/20 Page 1 of 3

1 XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
2 MICHAEL NEWMAN
Senior Assistant Attorney General
3 SARAH E. BELTON
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
4 REBEKAH A. FRETZ
JAMES F. ZAHRADKA II
5 GARRETT M. LINDSEY (SBN 293456)
Deputy Attorneys General
6 300 South Spring Street, Suite 1702
Los Angeles, CA 90013
7 Telephone: (213) 269-6402
E-mail: Garrett.Lindsey@doj.ca.gov
8 Attorneys for Plaintiff State of California
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
12

14 STATE OF MICHIGAN, STATE OF Case No. 3:20-cv-04478-SK
CALIFORNIA, et al.,
15 PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED
Plaintiffs, ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
16 EXCEED APPLICABLE PAGE LIMITS
v. AND EXPEDITE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
17 FOR PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
18 ELISABETH D. DEVOS, in her official
capacity as the United States Secretary of Judge: Hon. Sallie Kim
19 Education, and UNITED STATES Trial Date: None set
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Action Filed: July 7, 2020
20
Defendants.
21

Pls.’ Unopposed Admin. Mot. re Page Limits and Briefing Schedule re Prelim. Inj. Briefing (3:20-cv-04478-SK)
Case 3:20-cv-04478-SK Document 25 Filed 07/17/20 Page 2 of 3

1 INTRODUCTION

2 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11, Plaintiffs hereby move for relief from (1) the page

3 limits applicable under Civil Local Rule 7-4(b), and (2) the briefing deadlines applicable under

4 Civil Local Rule 7-3(a) and (c) for the Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed herewith.

5 DISCUSSION
6 Concurrent with this filing, Plaintiffs are filing a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (PI

7 Motion) seeking relief from Defendants’ actions relating to the provision of equitable services to

8 private school students using CARES Act funds. In light of the range and complexity of issues to

9 be addressed and the number of parties, good cause exists to extend the page limits for the

10 parties’ briefs. Plaintiffs request that the Court allow them to file a motion not to exceed 30

11 pages, Defendants to file an opposition not to exceed 30 pages, and Plaintiffs to file a reply brief

12 not to exceed 17 pages. Defendants have indicated their agreement with these proposed page

13 limit modifications. See Lindsey Decl. ¶¶ 4, 5, 8 & Ex. L.

14 In light of the urgent need for the parties and other stakeholders to have clarity on the

15 issues that are the subject of the PI Motion in a timely manner, good cause exists to expedite the

16 briefing on the motion. Plaintiffs request that the Court allow Defendants’ opposition to be filed

17 no later than July 29, and Plaintiffs’ reply to be filed no later than August 3. Defendants have

18 indicated their agreement with this proposed schedule. See Lindsey Decl. ¶ 6, 8 & Ex. L.

19 Plaintiffs have sought to resolve these issues via stipulation with Defendants; however, due

20 to the fact that counsel for Defendants has yet to appear in this matter, the parties were unable to

21 do so in a timely fashion, necessitating this motion. See Lindsey Decl. ¶¶ 7, 8 & Ex. L at 1; Civil

22 Local Rule 7-11(a).

28
1
Pls.’ Unopposed Admin. Mot. re Page Limits and Briefing Schedule re Prelim. Inj. Briefing (3:20-cv-04478-SK)
Case 3:20-cv-04478-SK Document 25 Filed 07/17/20 Page 3 of 3

1 Dated: July 17, 2020 Respectfully Submitted,

2 XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
3 MICHAEL L. NEWMAN
Senior Assistant Attorney General
4 SARAH E. BELTON
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
5
/s/ Garrett Lindsey
6
GARRETT LINDSEY
7 JAMES F. ZAHRADKA II
REBEKAH A. FRETZ
8 Deputy Attorneys General
Attorneys for Plaintiff State of California
9

11 DANA NESSEL
Attorney General of Michigan
12 FADWA A. HAMMOUD
Solicitor General
13 TONI L. HARRIS*
NEIL GIOVANATTI*
14 Assistant Attorneys General
Attorneys for Plaintiff State of Michigan
15 *Appearing Pro Hac Vice
16

28
2
Pls.’ Unopposed Admin. Mot. re Page Limits and Briefing Schedule re Prelim. Inj. Briefing (3:20-cv-04478-SK)

File and source

File: 25-administrative-motion-per-civil-local-rule-7-11.pdf
Size: 221,845 bytes
SHA-256: 44a10bc60b1ba4a6831f07fca75e284f2ec727832e3d850f9fd13adfbfcc2771
Our copy: 25-administrative-motion-per-civil-local-rule-7-11.pdf
Original: storage.courtlistener.com