SPRAWLDEF

SPRAWLDEF v. City of Richmond

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 21, 20194:18-cv-03918California1,500 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 SPRAWLDEF, ET AL., CASE NO. 18-cv-03918-YGR

8 Petitioners, ORDER DENYING STIPULATED REQUEST

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME; VACATING

9 vs. BRIEFING AND HEARING SCHEDULE ON

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE

10 CITY OF RICHMOND, ET AL., PLEADINGS; AND DIRECTING PARTIES TO

FILE STATEMENTS AS TO EFFECT OF

11 Respondents. PENDENCY OF APPEAL 12 Dkt. No. 91

13 The Stipulated Request for Extension of Time on the Briefing Schedule for the Motion for 14 Judgment on the Pleadings (Dkt. No. 91) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and the briefing and 15 hearing schedule on the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Dkt. No. 87) is VACATED. The 16 Court seeks clarification on the parties’ positions as to the effect of the pending appeal on the 17 Court’s jurisdiction to hear the motion, for the reasons set forth more fully herein. 18 I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 19 The petition in this matter was removed from state court on June 29,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.