Stipulation, State of Michigan et al. v. DeVos, No. 3:20-cv-04478 (N.D. Cal.), Doc. 62 (July 29, 2020)

Summary

Plaintiffs and Defendants in State of Michigan, State of California, et al. v. DeVos stipulate to adjust the briefing schedule on Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction and ask the Court to set the hearing. Defendants' opposition is to be filed on July 30, 2020, and Plaintiffs' reply on August 5, 2020. The stipulation states that Plaintiffs renoticed the motion after the matter was reassigned and set a hearing date of September 3, 2020, and that the parties agree it should be heard on an expedited basis because of the fast-approaching beginning of the school year. They request a hearing on August 7, 2020, or any date on or between August 10, 2020 and August 14, 2020.

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

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 3:20-cv-04478-JD Document 62. Filed 07/29/20

XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
MICHAEL NEWMAN
Senior Assistant Attorney General
SARAH E. BELTON
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
REBEKAH A. FRETZ
JAMES F. ZAHRADKA II
GARRETT M. LINDSEY (SBN 293456)
Deputy Attorneys General
300 South Spring Street, Suite 1702
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Telephone: (213) 269-6402
E-mail: Garrett.Lindsey@do}.ca.gov
Attorneys for Plaintiff State of California

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

STATE OF MICHIGAN, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

ELISABETH D. DEVOS, in her official
capacity as the United States Secretary of
Education, and UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,

Defendants.

1

Case No. 3:20-cv-04478-JD

STIPULATION TO SET BRIEFING
SCHEDULE AND SET HEARING FOR
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Judge: Hon. James Donato
Trial Date: None set
Action Filed: July 7, 2020

Stip. to Set Briefing Sched. and Set Hearing for Pls.' Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (3:20-cv-4478-JD)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 3:20-cv-04478-JD Document 62 Filed 07/29/20 Page 2of5

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2 and 7-12, the Plaintiffs and Defendants in the above-captioned
case stipulate and agree as follows:

1. On July 7, 2020, Plaintiffs filed a complaint in the above captioned matter (ECF No.
1). Between July 14 and July 16, counsel for Plaintiffs and Defendants met and conferred
regarding the briefing and hearing schedule for the motion for preliminary injunction that
Plaintiffs would seek. On July 17, Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint (ECF No. 24) and an
administrative order seeking to set the agreed-upon briefing schedule (ECF No. 25), with the
motion for preliminary injunction attached.

2. On July 20, pursuant to that administrative order, the Court ordered the parties to
proceed via an expedited briefing schedule (ECF No. 30), wherein the opposition to the
preliminary injunction would be filed on July 29, and the reply would be filed on August 3.

3. On July 22, the matter was reassigned to the Honorable Judge James Donato. (ECF
No. 38)

4. On July 24, counsel for the parties met and conferred to discuss the timing of the
hearing in light of the reassignment of the matter. Plaintiffs and Defendants discussed requesting
that the court hear the matter on August 6 or shortly thereafter.

5. On July 28, the parties met and conferred to discuss the briefing schedule, timing of
the hearing and other procedural issues. Counsel for Defendants requested that the required date
for filing the opposition brief be extended one day, from July 29 to July 30. Given that this
modification would correspondingly shorten Plaintiffs’ time to file their reply brief, the parties
agreed to move the reply deadline from August 3 to August 5.

6. Accordingly, the parties jointly agree to extend the current briefing deadlines as

follows:

Old Date | New Date | Document

Job July 30 Defendants’ Opposition to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Aveust3 | August 5 | Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of the Motion for Preliminary Injunction

2

Stip. to Set Briefing Sched. and Set Hearing for Pls.' Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (3:20-cv-4478-JD)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 3:20-cv-04478-JD Document 62 Filed 07/29/20 Page 3of5

7. Given the fast-approaching beginning of the school year, the parties agree the motion
for preliminary injunction should be heard as expeditiously as is reasonable, in order to provide
clarity to the parties regarding the permissible use of the emergency coronavirus relief funding at
issue in the matter. Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2(a), undersigned counsel for Plaintiffs has
submitted a declaration in support of this stipulation.

8. Following judicial reassignment, Plaintiffs are required to renotice the motion for
preliminary injunction. Immediately prior to filing this stipulation, Plaintiffs renoticed the motion
for preliminary injunction and set a hearing date of September 3, 2020, more than 35 days
following the notice as required by L.R. 7-2(a).

9. The parties agree that the motion should be heard on an expedited basis, and request
that the motion hearing be scheduled on Friday, August 7, 2020 or any day during the week of

August 10, 2020, at the convenience of the Court.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED and agreed to by and between counsel for parties
that:

(1) Defendants’ Opposition to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction shall be filed on
July 30, 2020;

(2) Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of the Motion for Preliminary Injunction shall be filed on
August 5, 2020; and

(3) Plaintiffs and Defendants request the Court set the motion hearing for Plaintiffs’ Motion
for Preliminary Injunction on August 7, 2020 or any date on or between August 10, 2020 and

August 14, 2020.

3

Stip. to Set Briefing Sched. and Set Hearing for Pls.' Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (3:20-cv-4478-JD)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 3:20-cv-04478-JD Document 62

Dated: July 29, 2020

By: /s/ Garrett Lindsey

XAVIER BECERRA

Attorney General of California
MICHAEL NEWMAN

Senior Assistant Attorney General
SARAH E. BELTON

Supervising Deputy Attorney General
GARRETT LINDSEY

JAMES F. ZAHRADKA II

REBEKAH A. FRETZ

Deputy Attorneys General

Attorneys for Plaintiff State of California

By: /s/ Neil Giovanatti

DANA NESSEL

Attorney General of Michigan

FADWA A. HAMMOUD

Solicitor General

NEIL GIOVANATTI*

TONI L. HARRIS*

Assistant Attorneys General

Attorneys for Plaintiff State of Michigan
*Appearing Pro Hac Vice

Filed 07/29/20 Page 4 of 5

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ETHAN P. DAVIS

Acting Assistant Attorney General
JENNIFER RICKETTS

Director, Federal Programs Branch
MARCIA BERMAN

Assistant Director, Federal Programs
Branch

/s/ Kate Talmor

KATE TALMOR (Maryland Bar)

Trial Attorney

U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division
1100 L Street, N.W.

Tel. (202) 616-8351
kate.talmor@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Defendants

4

Stip. to Set Briefing Sched. and Set Hearing for Pls.' Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (3:20-cv-4478-JD)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case 3:20-cv-04478-JD Document 62 Filed 07/29/20 Page5of5

ATTESTATION OF SIGNATURES

I, Garrett M. Lindsey, hereby attest, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 5-1(i)(3) of the Northern
District of California that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each

signatory hereto.

Dated: July 29, 2020 /s/ Garrett M. Lindsey

GARRETT M. LINDSEY
Deputy Attorney General
Attorney for State of California

5

Stip. to Set Briefing Sched. and Set Hearing for Pls.' Mot. for Prelim. Inj. (3:20-cv-4478-JD)


File and source

File

62-stipulation.pdf

Size

147,566 bytes

SHA-256

f9e58870a99e698c7e27347f3ee4525380bd91ed4c902de5f10ec95e284cfa15

Our copy

62-stipulation.pdf

Original

storage.courtlistener.com