3:10-cv-00257 #132
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/6/2019 3:10-cv-00257 #132
1/9
1
2
3
45
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MICHAEL F. HERTZDeputy Assistant Attorney GeneralMELINDA HAAGUnited States AttorneyARTHUR R. GOLDBERGAssistant Branch Director
CHRISTOPHER R. HALLTrial AttorneyUnited States Department of JusticeCivil Division, Federal Programs Branch
P.O. Box 883Washington, D.C. 20044Telephone: (202) 514-4778Facsimile: (202) 616-8470Email: [email protected]
Attorneys for Defendants
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
KAREN GOLINSKI
Plaintiff,
v.
THE UNITED STATES OFFICE OF
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, et al.
Defendants.
____________________________________
)))))))
)))))
No. C 3:10-00257-JSW
DEFENDANTS ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO ENLARGE PERIOD TO
FILE A BRIEF IN RESPONSE TO
MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND TO
EXCEED PAGE LIMITATIONS
Defendants United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and John Berry,
Director of OPM, respectfully move the Court for an order: (1) enlarging, to the extent necessary,
the period to respond to the pending motion to dismiss, ECF No. 118, and the motion to dismiss
and supporting memorandum of the Intervenor, the Bipartisan Litigation Advisory Group of the
United States House of Representatives (BLAG), in support of its motion to dismiss, ECF No.
119, to July 1, 2011, to permit Defendants to file a brief in response to those submissions; and (2)
permitting Defendants to file a responsive brief of up to thirty (30) pages.
Pursuant to L.Civ.R. 6-1, Defendants conferred multiple times with counsel for Plaintiff
Defendants Administrative Motion to Enlarge P eriod to File a Brief in Response to M otions to Dismiss and to
Exceed Page Limitations
3:10cv257-JSW
Case3:10-cv-00257-JSW Document132 Filed06/22/11 Page1 of 3
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected] -
8/6/2019 3:10-cv-00257 #132
2/9
1
2
3
45
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
and BLAG in an effort to reach agreement on the concept of a stipulated order permitting this or
similar relief. Counsel for Plaintiff agreed to the relief requested herein subject to the condition
that Plaintiff be provided until July 15, 2011, to file a response or reply to Defendants brief, as
appropriate. However, counsel for BLAG ultimately represented that BLAG would oppose thismotion.
As good cause for this motion, Defendants state as follows:
As set forth in previous submissions to the Court, the Executive Branch believes that
Section 3 of DOMA is subject to heightened constitutional scrutiny and is unconstitutional under
that standard. ECF Nos. 96, 112. On that basis, the Department of Justice will no longer defend
the constitutionality of Section 3, although the Executive departments and agencies will continue
to comply with Section 3, pursuant to the Presidents direction, unless and until Section 3 is
repealed by Congress or there is a definitive ruling by the Judicial Branch that Section 3 is
unconstitutional. In view of that position, BLAG has moved to intervene for the limited purpose
of defending the constitutionality of Section 3, ECF No. 103, and has moved pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiffs claim challenging the constitutionality of Section 3. ECF
No. 119. As previously explained, the Department of Justice has likewise submitted a motion to
dismiss to ensure that this Court can consider arguments on both sides of the constitutional issue
and to ensure that this Court has jurisdiction to enter judgment on the basis of those arguments.
ECF No. 118.
As the Department of Justice previously indicated, it also intends to file a brief that
presents the governments position on Plaintiffs equal protection challenge and intends to do
so at the appropriate procedural stage of this action, pursuant to any scheduling order entered by
this Court or otherwise. Id. The Department of Justice is preparing such a brief to be filed in
response to the pending motions to dismiss, and anticipates that it will be prepared to submit
such a brief to the Court by July 1, 2011. Thus, to the extent that the time for filing such a brief
by Defendants is or may be subject to the schedule governing briefing on the pending motions to
dismiss entered by the Courts Order of June 15, 2011, ECF No. 128, Defendants respectfully
Defendants Administrative Motion to Enlarge P eriod to File a Brief in Response to M otions to Dismiss and to
Exceed Page Limitations
3:10cv257-JSW 2
Case3:10-cv-00257-JSW Document132 Filed06/22/11 Page2 of 3
-
8/6/2019 3:10-cv-00257 #132
3/9
1
2
3
45
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
request that the Court extend such time by one week from June 24, 2011, through and including
July 1, 2011.
Likewise, Defendants respectfully request that the Court enlarge the page limitations
applicable to any such brief pursuant to 6 of the Courts Standing Order and thereby allowDefendants to submit a brief of up to thirty (30) pages. Such an enlargement is necessary to
permit the Department of Justice to fully and adequately present the governments position on
Plaintiffs equal protection challenge, and would be consistent with the enlargement previously
granted to BLAG for its memorandum in support of its motion to dismiss, ECF No. 115, and to
Plaintiff for her opposition to the motion to dismiss. ECF No. 128.
Dated: June 22, 2011
Respectfully Submitted,
MICHAEL F. HERTZDeputy Assistant Attorney General
MELINDA HAAGUnited States Attorney
ARTHUR R. GOLDBERGAssistant Branch Director
/s/ Christopher R. Hall
CHRISTOPHER R. HALLD.C. Bar No. 468827Trial AttorneyU.S. Department of JusticeCivil Division, Federal Programs BranchP.O. Box 883Washington, D.C. 20044(202) 514-4778 (telephone)(202) 616-8470 (fax)
Attorneys for Defendants
Defendants Administrative Motion to Enlarge P eriod to File a Brief in Response to M otions to Dismiss and to
Exceed Page Limitations
3:10cv257-JSW 3
Case3:10-cv-00257-JSW Document132 Filed06/22/11 Page3 of 3
-
8/6/2019 3:10-cv-00257 #132
4/9
Case3:10-cv-00257-JSW Document132-1 Filed06/22/11 Page1 of 4
-
8/6/2019 3:10-cv-00257 #132
5/9
Case3:10-cv-00257-JSW Document132-1 Filed06/22/11 Page2 of 4
-
8/6/2019 3:10-cv-00257 #132
6/9
Case3:10-cv-00257-JSW Document132-1 Filed06/22/11 Page3 of 4
-
8/6/2019 3:10-cv-00257 #132
7/9
Case3:10-cv-00257-JSW Document132-1 Filed06/22/11 Page4 of 4
-
8/6/2019 3:10-cv-00257 #132
8/9
1
2
3
45
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MICHAEL F. HERTZDeputy Assistant Attorney GeneralMELINDA HAAGUnited States AttorneyARTHUR R. GOLDBERGAssistant Branch Director
CHRISTOPHER R. HALLTrial AttorneyUnited States Department of JusticeCivil Division, Federal Programs Branch
P.O. Box 883Washington, D.C. 20044Telephone: (202) 514-4778Facsimile: (202) 616-8470Email: [email protected]
Attorneys for Defendants
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTNORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
KAREN GOLINSKI
Plaintiff,
v.
THE UNITED STATES OFFICE OF
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT andJOHN BERRY, Director of the Office ofPersonnel Management, in his officialcapacity
Defendants.
____________________________________
)))))))
))))))))
No. C 3:10-00257-JSW
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Upon consideration of Defendants Administrative Motion to Enlarge Period to
File a Brief in Response to Motions to Dismiss and to Exceed Page Limitations, and any
opposition thereto, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendants motion and orders as follows:
The period for Defendants to file a brief in response to the Motions to Dismiss is
enlarged through and including July 1, 2011;
Defendants are permitted to file a brief in response to the Motions to Dismiss of
up to thirty (30) pages in length; and
Plaintiffs period to file a response or reply to Defendants brief in response to the
Case3:10-cv-00257-JSW Document132-2 Filed06/22/11 Page1 of 2
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected] -
8/6/2019 3:10-cv-00257 #132
9/9