Articles

11-10-2017 – The End of California Concealed Carry

10-15-2017 – Governor Brown Signs Bill Allowing Guns Inside of Gun-Free School Zones

10-12-2017 – Is There a Right to Keep and Bear Arms? 9th Circuit to Decide in 2018

9-12-2017 – NRA Open Carry Lawsuit Opposes Open Carry

9-3-2017 – Supreme Court Long Conference on September 25, 2017

8-14-2017 – A Declaration That Open Carry Is the Right

7-28-2017 – Transcript Released in NRA’s Fake Open Carry Lawsuit

7-24-2017 – 50th Anniversary of California’s Loaded Open Carry Ban

7-12-2017 – Can we Save Our Right to Keep and Bear Arms?

6-27-2017 – Supreme Court Decides to Wait for Another Second Amendment Case

6/15/2017 – The Evil Practice of Carrying Weapons Secretly

6/6/2017 – NRA Lawyer says Odds are Supreme Court will NOT take Concealed Carry Case

6/2/2017 – The NRA Lost Another Second Amendment Appeal Today

5/29/2017 – Lead Plaintiff in Supreme Court Concealed Carry Appeal says Courts are Corrupt

5/23/2017 – Peruta Concealed Carry Lawsuit has Waited 2,768 Days – Supreme Court says Wait Longer

5/20/2017 – Second Amendment Case Peruta vs. California May Strike-Out at Supreme Court

5/03/2017 – Did the NRA Take a Dive in its Fake Open Carry Lawsuit?

5/01/2017 – Supreme Court Again Silent on Second Amendment

04/22/2017 – Supreme Court Math and Concealed Carry in Peruta v. California

04/14/2017 – Federal Judge Upholds Nonexistent Gun Ban

04/12/2017 – Concealed Carry, Incest, Gay Marriage and the Supreme Court

04/05/2017 – Justice Neil Gorsuch and the Second Amendment

3/29/2017 – The Next Second Amendment Handgun Carry Case to Go Down in Flames

3/28/2017 – Federal Judge Tells NRA to Put Up or Shut Up in Open Carry Lawsuit

3/22/2017 – Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor Finally Recognizes the Second Amendment

3/13/2017 – Another Second Amendment Appeal Shot-Down by the 9th Circuit

3/10/2017 – US Supreme Court to Decide Concealed Carry Petition in Two Weeks

3/5/2017 – The Florida Supreme Court Just Handed The US Supreme Court a Second Amendment Case It Can’t Refuse

2/23/2017 – California Asks Supreme Court to Wait For Nichols v. Brown Open Carry Appeal

2/15/2017 – NRA Got Spanked for Valentine’s Day!

2/3/2017 – President Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch

1/24/2017 -A Concealed Carry Case SCOTUS Can’t Refuse

1/23/2017 -President Trump’s Judicial Opportunity and Conundrum

1/13/2017 -NRA Tells Supreme Court Open Carry is Perverse

1/11/2017 – NRA Drops Supreme Court Concealed Carry Appeal

12/30/2016 – NRA Asks US Supreme Court To Hear Two Concealed Carry Lawsuits

12/10/2016 – National Concealed Carry Snake Oil Law Will Fail

11/29/2016 – What Lies Ahead for the Second Amendment?

11/10/2016 – The Second Amendment and President Trump

10/03/2016 – A Federal 9th Circuit Judge Finally Finds a Right to Bear Arms in Public

9/28/2016 – Are You Protected by the Fourth Amendment if You Carry a Firearm?

9/20/2016 – Two Concealed Carry Cases Fire Blanks in U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

9/8/2016 – Another Second Amendment Appeal Crashing and Burning in 9th Circuit

8/24/2016 – Concealed Carry Snake Oil and Kool-Aid Peddlers Leave Town for DC

8/18/2016 – The NRA Files Legal Challenge To California Open Carry Bans – But Not Really

8/17/2016 – The Battle for the Second Amendment Moves to Hawaii

8/15/2016 – There is No Right to Concealed Carry – 9th Circuit Denies Full Court Petitions

8/5/2016 – Did California Lie to 11 Federal Judges in Second Amendment Lawsuits?

7/15/2016 – God Save The US From The Second Amendment Lawyers

7/8/2016 – NRA Segregation Now, Tomorrow, and Forever Position Must Fail

7/4/2016 – Try Recalling California’s Anti-Gun Politicians Before Starting Your Revolution

6/27/2016 – NRA Head Wayne LaPierre Really, Really Hates the Second Amendment

6/24/2016 – Judges Who Uphold Bans on Concealed Carry Are Not the Same as Judges Who Look the Other Way When Police Murder People in the Street

6/15/2016 – Where is the NRA’s California Open Carry Lawsuit?

6/13/2016 – What’s Next for the Right to Carry Firearms in Public?

6/8/2016 – Florida Supreme Court Justices Voice Contempt for the Second Amendment

6/5/2016 – Florida Supreme Court to Hear Second Amendment Carry Case with National Ramifications

5/17/2016 – The Second Amendment and the Concealed Carry Problem

5/11/2016 – Federal Court of Appeals Goes Berserk During Second Amendment Gun Case Hearing

5/10/2016 – California Supreme Court Shoots Itself In Foot Over Gun Case

4/25/2016 – Second Amendment Foundation Files Another Concealed Carry Lawsuit: May Backfire

4/13/2016 – Has the NRA Come to Bury the Second Amendment or to Defend It? –

4/6/2016 – Second Amendment Must Wait A Bit Longer In 9th Circuit

3/26/2016 – Concealed Carry of Concealable Firearm in a Vehicle Now a Crime of Moral Turpitude

3/21/2016 – Supreme Court decision wasn’t about stun guns – It was about the Second Amendment decision in District of Columbia v. Heller which is bad news for concealed carry

3/7/2016 – How to Stop Anti-Gun Bills in California from Becoming Law

3/3/2016 – The California Supreme Court Case Which Could Upend the Gun-Groups Concealed Carry Lawsuits

2/24/2016 – The Second Amendment – Checkmate in Four Moves?

2/10/2016 – Why California’s Waiting Period to Purchase a Firearm Will Be Upheld

2/3/2016 – Florida House of Representatives Passes Handgun Open Carry Bill

1/27/2016 – The NRA Thinks Not Getting Caught In A Lie Is The Same Thing As Telling The Truth

12/11/2015 – Why Were the San Bernardino Shooting Victims Unarmed?

11/20/2015 – Attorney Alan Gura May Have Fumbled Another Second Amendment Case

11/20/2015 – HELP WANTED: Competent Second Amendment Lawyer – Inquire Within

11/9/2015 – The Supreme Court may have Finally Found its Next Second Amendment Case

9/2/2015 – Full Derp Battle over Concealed Carry in District of Columbia

9/1/2015 – National Rifle Association Drops Lawsuit against San Francisco

8/31/2015 – The Future of the Second Amendment in California and Hawaii

8/25/2015 – Yes, America, the Second Amendment is a Universal Right!

8/14/2015 – Will this be the Supreme Court’s Next Second Amendment Case?

7/3/2015 – The Future of Open Carry in California Looks Bright

6/16/2015 – State of California Concedes Second Amendment Extends Outside the Home

6/8/2015 – The Second Amendment is Now in the Hands of these Eleven Judges

6/8/2015 – Supreme Court Won’t Hear Second Amendment Cases Until there is a Circuit Split

5/29/2015 – NRA Opposes Open Carry – NRA Now Takes Credit for New Texas Handgun Open Carry Law

5/26/2015 – Four Years Ago Today: Is Open Carry The Right Guaranteed By The Second Amendment

5/18/2015 – Why the Second Amendment Keeps Losing in Court

5/2/2015 – Black Panther Party Invades California Capitol – 48 Years Ago Today

5/1/2015 – The NRA Rearranges Deck Chairs on the Titanic

4/22/2015 – Chief Judge of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Grants Motion of Lone Voice Defending the Second Amendment Open Carry Right

4/11/2015 – An Open Letter to the Orange County Register’s Editorial on Concealed Carry

4/03/2015 – Another Shoe Drops on the California Concealed Carry Lawsuits

2/27/2015 – Federal Judge Says No Second Amendment Right To Own Firearms

12/6/2014 – The First Shoe Drops On California Concealed Carry Lawsuits

11/30/2014 – Open Carry Gunfight At The California Corral: Start Of Year Four

11/30/2014 – California Open Carry Gunfight Begins Its Fourth Year

11/12/2014 – California Concealed Carry Permits – The Fat Lady Still Hasn’t Sung in Peruta v. San Diego

10/17/2014 – It may be Legal to Carry a Handgun in the Nation’s Capitol by Christmas

10/3/2014 – Another California Concealed Carry Lawsuit Loses before a Federal Judge

8/18/2014 – District of Columbia asks Court for More Time to Enact New Handgun Carry Ban

8/13/2014 – California Concealed Carry Case Peruta v. San Diego – Poised to Move or Stuck in the Mud?

7/30/2014 – Federal Judge Reluctantly Stays his Ruling in DC Handgun Ban

7/28/2014 – The DC Handgun Carry Decision – Throwing Victory into the Jaws of Defeat

7/26/2014 – Ban on Carrying Firearms in Public is Unconstitutional says DC Judge

7/21/2014 – The non-repeal of D.C., Gun-Control

7/2/2014 – US Supreme Court Still Silent On Second Amendment

6/28/2014 – Federal Judge Says Minorities Barred From Bringing Civil Rights Lawsuits

6/7/2014 – The NRA Supports Open Carry Except When The NRA Opposes Open Carry

6/2/2014 – NRA Lawyer Says California Concealed Carry Decision Likely To Be Overturned

6/1/2014 – NRA leadership Comes Out Of The Closet In Its Opposition To Open Carry

Please
donate $10, $25, $50 or $100 to the legal fund to restore your
right to openly carry a loaded firearm in California.

Click
here to donate to the legal fund

(Credit
or Debit cards – Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover or eCheck)


GoFundMe PayPal

Please donate $10, $25, $50 or $100 to the fight to restore your right to openly carry a loaded firearm in California.

Click here to donate.

Piryx

(Credit or Debit cards – Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover or eCheck)

BitCoins 1AdtAJfcdBkA777fwtVhmCwSwCKGTFrgGz Press@CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

Jordan Gallinger, et al v. Xavier Becerra - CalGuns.nuts

Share

This Appeal is now stylized as Jordan Gallinger, et al v. Xavier Becerra

Garcia v. Harris (CalGuns.nuts)

Jordan Gallinger v. Xavier Becerra – An appeal from the dismissal of an action which alleged that the retired peace officer exemption to the California Gun-Free School Zone Act, Cal. Penal Code § 626.9(o), violates the Equal Protection Clause.

2018-02-09  9:30 am  Courtroom 1, Richard H. Chambers US Court of Appeals, Pasadena

Just 59 days until oral argument!




The case was dismissed with prejudice.  An appeal has been filed.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Case No. 16-56125

As this is just another CalGuns.nuts concealed carry lawsuit I did not pay much attention to this case until early in the morning  of April 12, 2017 when I read the Amicus brief filed by the CATO Institute and the district court decision.

The CalGuns.nuts complaint, according to the decision of the district court judge, prohibits persons who have a CCW from carrying a handgun within 1,000 feet of a K-12 public or private school while exempting retired police officers.

The lawsuit challenges that retired police officer exemption.

The district court judge dismissed their case with prejudice saying that the exception for retired peace officers coupled with the prohibition for CCW holders does not violate the 14th Amendment.
The problem with the case the district court judge seems to have overlooked is that persons who hold a CCW are not prohibited from carrying a handgun in the 1,000 foot gun-free school zone extending from a K-12 public school.  Regardless, the state’s Answering Brief makes it perfectly clear that CCW holders can carry handguns within 1,000 feet of a K-12 public or private school.

SB707 removed the automatic exemption that CCW holders had to carry in schools and on school grounds.  SB707 did not remove the automatic exemption for CCW holders to carry a handgun within 1,000 feet of a K-12 public or private school.

Congratulations CalGuns.nuts, you have surpassed yourself in getting a Federal district court judge to uphold a law which does not exist.

And congratulations to Federal District Court Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell, an Obama appointee, for not bothering to read the law which was being challenged.



On May 1, 2016 it will be two years since district court judge S. James Otero issued his final judgment in my California Open Carry lawsuit. A lawsuit which contained a number of legal challenges including various rational basis challenges.

I filed an opening brief attached to a motion to exceed the type volume limitations in which I cited Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F. 3d 1052 – Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit (2002) ten times.  Unlike the other so called gun-rights groups, I’m using 9th Circuit and US Supreme precedents regarding rational basis review to attack the laws I am challenging in my California Open Carry lawsuit on every level and from my initial filing in the district court until my California Open Carry lawsuit cannot be taken any higher.

Brandon Combs of CalGuns.nuts must have read my briefs given nobody else had cited Silveria before I did in a post-Heller Second Amendment case.  It must have eventually occurred to him that he too could file a lawsuit under the same legal theory because here we are, he filed a lawsuit today (April 14, 2016) seeking to strike down part of the California Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995 which exempts retired police officers.

Combs told his furry footed, pointy headed minions at the CalGuns.nuts forum that he went to Sacramento and told the various powers that be that if they passed various bills, including the bill which removed the automatic exemption for CCW holders to carry on school grounds he would file a lawsuit to eliminate all retired police officer exemptions wherever they may be.
Combs, which is to say CalGuns, his front group the FPC, the Madison Society (famous for filing the worst Amicus brief I ever read anywhere in the Peruta en banc) and a bunch of his pointy headed associates just filed a lawsuit to strike down the retired police officer exemption (PC 626.9(o)) here in the Central District.
If there is a god, this case will be assigned to Judge Otero and Segal will be the magistrate judge.
I can hardly wait to write my Amicus brief.  😀

P.S. Combs didn’t tell the Kool-Aid drinkers at CalGuns.nuts that his “foundation” paid him around $$48,188.45 for his brief trip to Sacramento in 2013.
P.P.S. I just gave the Complaint a thorough read. There are numerous defects in the pleading, not the least of which is they plaintiffs forgot to tell the court why they have legal standing to obtain the relief they requested (lawsuits get dismissed for lack of standing quite often).

Here is a link to the Complaint.  Given the number of fatal defects in the Complaint I suspect that it will be replaced and perhaps replaced sooner than later.  Perhaps even before AG Harris files a motion to dismiss instead of an Answer.

The case was dismissed with prejudice.  An appeal has been filed.  Here is the Order dismissing the Complaint with prejudice.

Appellants’ Opening Brief due 04/03/2017. Filed on 04/03/2017.

Appellants’ Motion to Take Judicial Notice Filed on 04/03/2017.

Appellants’ Excerpts of Record due 04/03/2017. Filed on 04/03/2017.

CATO Institute Amicus Brief in Support of Appellants

Answering Brief due 06/02/2017. Filed on 06/02/2017.

Reply Brief – Filed on 06/16/2017.

CalGuns.nuts

Friends don’t let friends belong to CalGuns.nuts




Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 1, 2017 – Oral argument was calendared on November 26th but the parties were not notified until today.

12/01/2017  34 Notice of Oral Argument on Friday, February 9, 2018 – 09:30 A.M. – Courtroom 1 – Pasadena CA.

View the Oral Argument Calendar for your case here.

Be sure to review the GUIDELINES for important information about your hearing, including when to arrive (30 minutes before the hearing time) and when and how to submit additional citations (filing electronically as far in advance of the hearing as possible).

When you have reviewed the calendar, download the ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF HEARING NOTICE form, complete the form, and file it via Appellate ECF or return the completed form to: PASADENA Office.
[10675237] (DJW) [Entered: 12/01/2017 03:24 PM]

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 26, 2017 – Oral argument scheduled.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 25, 2017 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 8, 2017 – Much to my surprise, this appeal is being considered for oral argument in Pasadena, in February.  There is a good chance it will be assigned to the same panel as my appeal.

33 – Jordan Gallinger, et al. v. Xavier Becerra

10/10/2017  32 This case is being considered for an upcoming oral argument calendar in Pasadena

Please review the Pasadena sitting dates for February 2018 and the two subsequent sitting months in that location at http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/court_sessions. If you have an unavoidable conflict on any of the dates, please inform the court within 3 days of this notice, using CM/ECF (Type of Document: File Correspondence to Court; Subject: regarding availability for oral argument).

When setting your argument date, the court will try to work around unavoidable conflicts; the court is not able to accommodate mere scheduling preferences. You will receive notice that your case has been assigned to a calendar approximately 10 weeks before the scheduled oral argument date.

If the parties wish to discuss settlement before an argument date is set, they should jointly request referral to the mediation unit by filing a letter within 3 days of this notice, using CM/ECF (Type of Document: File Correspondence to Court; Subject: request for mediation).[10610797] (AW) [Entered: 10/10/2017 11:02 AM]

10/13/2017  33  Filed (ECF) Appellee Xavier Becerra Correspondence: Subject: regarding availability for oral argument. Date of service: 10/13/2017 [10617664] [16-56125] (Echeverria, John) [Entered: 10/13/2017 03:22 PM]

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 31, 2017 – Nothing new.  It will probably be a couple of years before oral argument is scheduled in this appeal and so my future updates will likely be far less frequent.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 8, 2017 – I linked the Answering Brief and Reply Brief.  Also, new activity on the docket:

05/26/2017  22 Appellee Kamala D. Harris in 16-56125 substituted by Appellee Xavier Becerra in 16-56125 [10450950] (AF) [Entered: 05/26/2017 04:05 PM]
05/26/2017  23 Terminated Appellant Ulises Garcia in 16-56125 [10450953] (AF) [Entered: 05/26/2017 04:07 PM]
06/02/2017  24  Submitted (ECF) Answering Brief for review. Submitted by Appellee Xavier Becerra. Date of service: 06/02/2017. [10458461] [16-56125] (Echeverria, John) [Entered: 06/02/2017 04:36 PM]
06/02/2017  25  Filed (ECF) Appellee Xavier Becerra response opposing motion ([10] Motion (ECF Filing), [10] Motion (ECF Filing) motion to take judicial notice). Date of service: 06/02/2017. [10458502] [16-56125] (Echeverria, John) [Entered: 06/02/2017 04:50 PM]
06/05/2017  26  Filed clerk order: The answering brief [24] submitted by Xavier Becerra is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: red. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate CM/ECF. [10460069] (GWL) [Entered: 06/05/2017 02:31 PM]
06/08/2017  27 Received 7 paper copies of Answering Brief [24] filed by Xavier Becerra. [10465126] (SD) [Entered: 06/08/2017 02:04 PM]
06/16/2017  28  Submitted (ECF) Reply Brief for review. Submitted by Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas. Date of service: 06/16/2017. [10477586] [16-56125] (Benbrook, Bradley) [Entered: 06/16/2017 04:51 PM]
06/16/2017  29  Filed (ECF) Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas reply to response (). Date of service: 06/16/2017. [10477590] [16-56125] (Benbrook, Bradley) [Entered: 06/16/2017 04:52 PM]
06/19/2017  30  Filed clerk order: The reply brief [28] submitted by appellants is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: gray. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate CM/ECF. [10479151] (GWL) [Entered: 06/19/2017 02:13 PM]
06/22/2017  31 Received 7 paper copies of Reply Brief [28] filed by appellants. [10484007] (SD) [Entered: 06/22/2017 10:24 AM]

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 12, 2017 – Answering Brief now due on June 2, 2017.

04/14/2017  17 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus Brief [14] filed by Cato Institute. [10396480] (SD) [Entered: 04/14/2017 11:14 AM]
04/18/2017  18 Filed (ECF) Streamlined request for extension of time to file Answering Brief by Appellee Kamala D. Harris. New requested due date is 06/02/2017. [10401125] [16-56125] (Echeverria, John) [Entered: 04/18/2017 02:57 PM]
04/18/2017  19 Streamlined request [18] by Appellee Kamala D. Harris to extend time to file the brief is approved. Amended briefing schedule: Appellee Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General answering brief due 06/02/2017. The optional reply brief is due 14 days from the date of service of the answering brief. [10401303] (BG) [Entered: 04/18/2017 03:40 PM]

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 12, 2017 – As this is just another CalGuns.nuts concealed carry lawsuit I did not pay much attention to this case until early this morning when I read the Amicus brief filed by the CATO Institute and the district court decision.

The CalGuns.nuts complaint, according to the decision of the district court judge, prohibits persons who have a CCW from carrying a handgun within 1,000 feet of a K-12 public or private school while exempting retired police officers.

The lawsuit challenges that retired police officer exemption.

The district court judge dismissed their case with prejudice saying that the exception for retired peace officers coupled with the prohibition for CCW holders does not violate the 14th Amendment.
The problem with the case the district court judge seems to have overlooked is that persons who hold a CCW are not prohibited from carrying a handgun in the 1,000 foot gun-free school zone extending from a K-12 public school.

SB707 removed the automatic exemption that CCW holders had to carry in schools and on school grounds.  SB707 did not remove the automatic exemption for CCW holders to carry a handgun within 1,000 feet of a K-12 public or private school.

Congratulations CalGuns.nuts, you have surpassed yourself in getting a Federal district court judge to uphold a law which does not exist.

And congratulations to Federal District Court Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell, an Obama appointee, for not bothering to read the law which was being challenged.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 23,  2017 – Nothing new.  There probably won’t be much new until the Opening Brief is filed.  It is due on April 3, 2017.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 22,  2017 – There is a new briefing schedule for the appeal.  The docket as of today is below.  I won’t be following this case very closely.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 8,  2016 – This is odd.  The hearing was still scheduled to take place today when I last checked it five days ago.  And so I checked the docket only to discover that not only was the motion to dismiss granted on Friday, it was granted with prejudice.  By law, a plaintiff is allowed to file at least one amended complaint unless the complaint is frivolous or otherwise incapable of amendment.  The judge said the complaint is incapable of amendment.  A notice of appeal has already been filed.

From the date of filing to a dismissal with prejudice was just 3 months and 22 days.  This must be a new record.

As much as I dislike CalGuns.nuts and would like to blame their shoddy lawyering for the loss, any competent judge would know that the court of appeals is going to eventually kick this case back to the district court judge.  Which means Judge O’Connell is either playing politics or is incompetent, or both.

Order dismissing Complaint with prejudice.




 Full Docket Report as of August 8, 2017.

General Docket
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals Docket #: 16-56125 Docketed: 08/08/2016
Nature of Suit: 3950 Constitutionality of State Statutes
Jordan Gallinger, et al v. Xavier Becerra
Appeal From: U.S. District Court for Central California, Los Angeles
Fee Status: Paid
Case Type Information:
     1) civil
     2) private
     3) null
Originating Court Information:
     District: 0973-2 : 2:16-cv-02572-BRO-AFM
     Court Reporter: Hilda Avila, Court Reporter Supervisor
     Trial Judge: Beverly Reid O’Connell, District Judge
     Date Filed: 04/14/2016
     Date Order/Judgment:      Date Order/Judgment EOD:      Date NOA Filed:      Date Rec’d COA:
     08/05/2016      08/05/2016      08/08/2016      08/08/2016
Prior Cases:
     None
Current Cases:
     None

 

ULISES GARCIA
Terminated: 05/26/2017
Plaintiff – Appellant,
JORDAN GALLINGER
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Benbrook Law Group, PC
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 2530
Sacramento, CA 95814Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Benbrook Law Group, PC
400 Capitol Mall
Suite 2530
Sacramento, CA 95814
BRIAN HILL
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
BROOKE HILL
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
CRAIG DELUZ
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
SCOTT DIPMAN
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
ALBERT DUNCAN
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
TRACEY GRAHAM
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
LISA JANG
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
DENNIS SERBU
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
MICHAEL VEREDAS
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
FIREARMS POLICY COALITION
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
MADISON SOCIETY FOUNDATION
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
THE CALGUNS FOUNDATION
Plaintiff – Appellant,
Bradley A. Benbrook, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)Stephen M. Duvernay, Attorney
Direct: 916-447-4900
[COR LD NTC Retained]
(see above)
   v.
KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney General, in her official capacity as Attorney General of California
Terminated: 05/26/2017
Defendant – Appellee,
XAVIER BECERRA, in her official capacity as Attorney General of California
Defendant – Appellee,
Mark Randolph Beckington, Supervising Deputy Attorney General
[COR LD NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
California Department of Justice
300 S. Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90013John Darrow Echeverria, Attorney
[COR LD NTC Dep State Aty Gen]
California Department of Justice
300 S. Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90013
——————————
CATO INSTITUTE
Amicus Curiae,
Ilya Shapiro
Direct: 202-842-0200
[COR LD NTC Retained]
Cato Institute
Firm: 202-218-4600
1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001

JORDAN GALLINGER; BRIAN HILL; BROOKE HILL; CRAIG DELUZ; SCOTT DIPMAN; ALBERT DUNCAN; TRACEY GRAHAM; LISA JANG; DENNIS SERBU; MICHAEL VEREDAS; FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION; FIREARMS POLICY COALITION; MADISON SOCIETY FOUNDATION; THE CALGUNS FOUNDATION,

Plaintiffs – Appellants,

v.

XAVIER BECERRA, in her official capacity as Attorney General of California,

Defendant – Appellee.

08/08/2016   1 
16 pg, 1.5 MB
DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Mediation Questionnaire due on 08/15/2016. Transcript ordered by 09/07/2016. Transcript due 12/06/2016. Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas opening brief due 01/17/2017. Appellee Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General answering brief due 02/16/2017. Appellant’s optional reply brief is due 14 days after service of the answering brief. [10079288] (JN) [Entered: 08/08/2016 02:33 PM]
08/15/2016   2 
4 pg, 1.93 MB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 08/15/2016. [10086630] [16-56125] (Benbrook, Bradley) [Entered: 08/15/2016 10:30 AM]
08/22/2016   3 
2 pg, 194.68 KB
Filed Mediation order: This case is NOT SELECTED for inclusion in the Mediation Program. Counsel may contact circuit mediator to discuss services available through the court’s mediation program, to request a settlement assessment conf, or to request a stay of the appeal for settlement purposes. Also, upon agreement of the parties, the brfing sch can be modified or vacated to facilitate settlement discussions. Csl are requested to send copies of this order to their clients. Info regarding the mediation program may be found at www.ca9.uscourts.gov/mediation. [10095812] (CL) [Entered: 08/22/2016 03:13 PM]
01/05/2017   4 
3 pg, 208.6 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas Unopposed Motion to extend time to file Opening brief until 04/03/2017. Date of service: 01/05/2017. [10256081] [16-56125] (Benbrook, Bradley) [Entered: 01/05/2017 02:08 PM]
01/13/2017   5 
2 pg, 34.65 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: TAH): The appellant’s motion (Docket Entry No. [4]) for an extension of time in which to file the opening brief is denied without prejudice to a renewed motion that includes the declaration set forth at Ninth Circuit Rule 31-2.2(b). The parties are informed that extensions of time for filing briefs are granted only upon the showing of good cause, and not by stipulation. 9th Cir. R. 31-2.2(b). In the absence of a renewed motion, the opening brief will be due January 23, 2017, the answering brief will be due February 22, 2017, and the optional reply brief will be due within 14 days after service of the answering brief. [10265519] (WL) [Entered: 01/13/2017 01:28 PM]
01/13/2017   6 
8 pg, 243.24 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas Unopposed Motion to extend time to file Opening brief until 04/03/2017. Date of service: 01/13/2017. [10265869] [16-56125] (Duvernay, Stephen) [Entered: 01/13/2017 03:28 PM]
01/17/2017   7 
1 pg, 183.99 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: th): Granting the Appellant’s Unopposed Renewed Motion [6] (ECF Filing) to extend time to file the opening brief. The appellants’ opening brief is due 04/03/2017. Appellee Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General answering brief due 05/03/2017. The optional reply brief is due 14 days after service of the answering brief. [10267078] (TH) [Entered: 01/17/2017 10:18 AM]
04/03/2017   8 
45 pg, 308.42 KB
Submitted (ECF) Opening Brief for review. Submitted by Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation, Michael Veredas. Date of service: 04/03/2017. [10381543] [16-56125]–[COURT UPDATE: Updated docket text to reflect correct party filer. 04/05/2017 by SLM] (Benbrook, Bradley) [Entered: 04/03/2017 03:42 PM]
04/03/2017   9 
61 pg, 20.68 MB
Submitted (ECF) excerpts of record. Submitted by Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation, Michael Veredas. Date of service: 04/03/2017. [10381559] [16-56125]–[COURT UPDATE: Updated docket text to reflect correct party filer. 04/05/2017 by SLM] (Benbrook, Bradley) [Entered: 04/03/2017 03:44 PM]
04/03/2017   10 
103 pg, 2.45 MB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas Motion to take judicial notice of. Date of service: 04/03/2017. [10381571] [16-56125] (Benbrook, Bradley) [Entered: 04/03/2017 03:49 PM]
04/05/2017   11 
2 pg, 186.29 KB
Filed clerk order: The opening brief [8] submitted by appellants is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: blue. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate CM/ECF. The Court has reviewed the excerpts of record [9] submitted by appellants. Within 7 days of this order, filer is ordered to file 4 copies of the excerpts in paper format, with a white cover. The paper copies must be in the format described in 9th Circuit Rule 30-1.6. [10384226] (GWL) [Entered: 04/05/2017 10:08 AM]
04/06/2017   12 Received 7 paper copies of Opening Brief [8] filed by appellants. [10386724] (SD) [Entered: 04/06/2017 02:12 PM]
04/06/2017   13 Filed 4 paper copies of excerpts of record [9] in 1 volume(s) filed by appellants. [10387671] (GWL) [Entered: 04/07/2017 09:54 AM]
04/10/2017   14 
26 pg, 191.5 KB
Submitted (ECF) Amicus brief for review (by government or with consent per FRAP 29(a)). Submitted by Cato Institute. Date of service: 04/10/2017. [10389672] [16-56125] (Shapiro, Ilya) [Entered: 04/10/2017 10:47 AM]
04/11/2017   15 Entered appearance of Amicus Curiae Cato Institute. [10391429] (KT) [Entered: 04/11/2017 10:09 AM]
04/11/2017   16 
2 pg, 185.9 KB
Filed clerk order: The amicus brief [14] submitted by Cato Institute is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: green. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate CM/ECF. [10391432] (KT) [Entered: 04/11/2017 10:09 AM]
04/14/2017   17 Received 7 paper copies of Amicus Brief [14] filed by Cato Institute. [10396480] (SD) [Entered: 04/14/2017 11:14 AM]
04/18/2017   18 Filed (ECF) Streamlined request for extension of time to file Answering Brief by Appellee Kamala D. Harris. New requested due date is 06/02/2017. [10401125] [16-56125] (Echeverria, John) [Entered: 04/18/2017 02:57 PM]
04/18/2017   19 Streamlined request [18] by Appellee Kamala D. Harris to extend time to file the brief is approved. Amended briefing schedule: Appellee Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General answering brief due 06/02/2017. The optional reply brief is due 14 days from the date of service of the answering brief.[10401303] (BG) [Entered: 04/18/2017 03:40 PM]
05/25/2017   20 
3 pg, 125.71 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas Stipulated Motion to dismiss party from case. Date of service: 05/25/2017. [10448504] [16-56125] (Duvernay, Stephen) [Entered: 05/25/2017 11:42 AM]
05/26/2017   21 
1 pg, 33.08 KB
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: TAH): The parties’ stipulated motion (Docket Entry No. [20]) for voluntary dismissal of the appeal as to appellant Ulises Garcia only is granted. Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). The appeal shall continue as to the remaining parties. A copy of this order sent to the district court shall act as and for the mandate of this court as to appellant Ulises Garcia only. The Clerk shall amend court records to reflect that the appellee in this appeal is Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of the State of California. Fed. R. App. P. 43(c). [10450947] (AF) [Entered: 05/26/2017 04:04 PM]
05/26/2017   22 Appellee Kamala D. Harris in 16-56125 substituted by Appellee Xavier Becerra in 16-56125 [10450950] (AF) [Entered: 05/26/2017 04:05 PM]
05/26/2017   23 Terminated Appellant Ulises Garcia in 16-56125 [10450953] (AF) [Entered: 05/26/2017 04:07 PM]
06/02/2017   24 
67 pg, 491.48 KB
Submitted (ECF) Answering Brief for review. Submitted by Appellee Xavier Becerra. Date of service: 06/02/2017. [10458461] [16-56125] (Echeverria, John) [Entered: 06/02/2017 04:36 PM]
06/02/2017   25 
5 pg, 146.5 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellee Xavier Becerra response opposing motion ([10] Motion (ECF Filing), [10] Motion (ECF Filing) motion to take judicial notice). Date of service: 06/02/2017. [10458502] [16-56125] (Echeverria, John) [Entered: 06/02/2017 04:50 PM]
06/05/2017   26 
2 pg, 187.34 KB
Filed clerk order: The answering brief [24] submitted by Xavier Becerra is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: red. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate CM/ECF. [10460069] (GWL) [Entered: 06/05/2017 02:31 PM]
06/08/2017   27 Received 7 paper copies of Answering Brief [24] filed by Xavier Becerra. [10465126] (SD) [Entered: 06/08/2017 02:04 PM]
06/16/2017   28 
26 pg, 226.18 KB
Submitted (ECF) Reply Brief for review. Submitted by Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas. Date of service: 06/16/2017. [10477586] [16-56125] (Benbrook, Bradley) [Entered: 06/16/2017 04:51 PM]
06/16/2017   29 
4 pg, 319.05 KB
Filed (ECF) Appellants Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation and Michael Veredas reply to response (). Date of service: 06/16/2017. [10477590] [16-56125] (Benbrook, Bradley) [Entered: 06/16/2017 04:52 PM]
06/19/2017   30 
2 pg, 187.38 KB
Filed clerk order: The reply brief [28] submitted by appellants is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 7 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification, attached to the end of each copy of the brief, that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: gray. The paper copies shall be printed from the PDF version of the brief created from the word processing application, not from PACER or Appellate CM/ECF. [10479151] (GWL) [Entered: 06/19/2017 02:13 PM]
06/22/2017   31 Received 7 paper copies of Reply Brief [28] filed by appellants. [10484007] (SD) [Entered: 06/22/2017 10:24 AM]

 

 


 



2:16-cv-02572-BRO-AFM Ulises Garcia et al v. Kamala Harris
Beverly Reid O’Connell, presiding
Alexander F. MacKinnon, referral
Date filed: 04/14/2016
Date terminated: 08/05/2016
Date of last filing: 08/08/2016

History

 

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
21
Filed & Entered:   08/08/2016
Docket Text Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
20
Filed & Entered:   08/05/2016
Docket Text Order on Motion to Dismiss
19
Filed & Entered:   07/25/2016
Docket Text Reply (Motion related)
16
Filed & Entered:   07/18/2016
Docket Text Objection/Opposition (Motion related)
17
Filed & Entered:   07/18/2016
Docket Text Objection/Opposition (Motion related)
18
Filed & Entered:   07/18/2016
Docket Text Proof of Service (subsequent documents)
14
Filed & Entered:   06/10/2016
Terminated: 08/05/2016
Docket Text Motion to Dismiss (cause or other)
15
Filed & Entered:   06/10/2016
Docket Text Request for Judicial Notice
13
Filed & Entered:   05/11/2016
Docket Text Stipulation Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less)
12
Filed & Entered:   04/27/2016
Docket Text Service of Summons and Complaint Returned Executed (21 days)
11
Filed & Entered:   04/20/2016
Docket Text Summons Issued (Attorney Civil Case Opening)
4
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Notice of Assignment to United States Judges(CV-18) – optional html form
5
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Notice to Parties of Court-Directed ADR Program (ADR-8) – optional html form
6
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Initial Order upon Filing of Complaint – form only
7
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Request to Issue Summons
8
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Deficiency in Attorney Case Opening – optional html form
9
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties
10
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Summons Request
1
Filed & Entered:   04/14/2016
Docket Text Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening)
2
Filed & Entered:   04/14/2016
Docket Text Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71)
3
Filed & Entered:   04/14/2016
Docket Text Summons Request

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 3,  2016 – Nothing new.  It looks like the motion to dismiss hearing is still scheduled for Monday.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 28,  2016 – New activity.  The motion to dismiss hearing is scheduled for August 8th.

19 – CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL KAMALA D. HARRIS’S REPLY IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

Full docket text for document 16:
PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION To Motion To Dismiss re: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Complaint [14] filed by Plaintiffs Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation, Michael Veredas. (Benbrook, Bradley)

Full docket text for document 17:
PLAINTIFFS’ OBJECTION To Defendant’s Request For Judicial Notice In Support Of Motion To Dismiss re: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Complaint [14] filed by Plaintiffs Craig DeLuz, Scott Dipman, Albert Duncan, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Jordan Gallinger, Ulises Garcia, Tracey Graham, Brian Hill, Brooke Hill, Lisa Jang, Madison Society Foundation, Dennis Serbu, The Calguns Foundation, Michael Veredas. (Benbrook, Bradley)

Full docket text for document 19:
REPLY in Further Support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Complaint [14] filed by Defendant Kamala D. Harris. (Echeverria, John)

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
19
Filed & Entered:   07/25/2016
Docket Text Reply (Motion related)
16
Filed & Entered:   07/18/2016
Docket Text Objection/Opposition (Motion related)
17
Filed & Entered:   07/18/2016
Docket Text Objection/Opposition (Motion related)
18
Filed & Entered:   07/18/2016
Docket Text Proof of Service (subsequent documents)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 12,  2016 – Nothing new but there is a local rule for the Central District requiring a decision on motions within 120 days.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 30,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 27,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 11,  2016 – Motion to dismiss and Request for Judicial Notice filed.  14 – Motion to Dismiss 15 – Request for Judicial Notice

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
14
Filed & Entered:   06/10/2016
Docket Text Motion to Dismiss (cause or other)
15
Filed & Entered:   06/10/2016
Docket Text Request for Judicial Notice

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 27,  2016 – Nothing new since May 11th, which is odd given that failure to file a timely Answer to a Complaint can result in a default judgment.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 17,  2016 – Nothing new, which is odd given that failure to file a timely Answer to a Complaint can result in a default judgment.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 11,  2016 – Extensions of  time are supposed to be requested via a motion.  Instead, a stipulation of time to extend the date to file the Answer was filed.  Judges have sanctioned lawyers for presuming they can set the schedule for the court.  We’ll see what happens here.

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
13
Filed & Entered:   05/11/2016
Docket Text Stipulation Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 29,  2016 – Well, this CalGuns.nuts lawsuit is stumbling as it leaves the starting gate.  The Plaintiffs’ attorney has already been smacked with two notices of deficiencies including one threatening sanctions for noncompliance with the local rules.  The judge assigned to this case is an Obama appointee, Beverly Reid O’Connell.

Full docket text for document 7:
NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Request to Issue Summons RE: Summons Request, [3]. The following error(s) was found: The caption of the summons must match the caption of the complaint verbatim. If the caption is too large to fit in the space provided, enter the name of the first party and then write see attached.Next, attach a face page of the complaint or a second page addendum to the Summons. The summons cannot be issued until this defect has been corrected. Please correct the defect and re-file your request. (jtil)

Full docket text for document 8:
NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening. The following error(s) was found: No Notice of Interested Parties has been filed. A Notice of Interested Parties must be filed with every partys first appearance. See Local Rule 7.1-1. Counsel must file a Notice of Interested Parties immediately. Failure to do so may be addressed by judicial action, including sanctions. See Local Rule 83-7. (jtil)

 

 

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 14,  2016 – Complaint filed.

 




2:16-cv-02572-BRO-AFM Ulises Garcia et al v. Kamala Harris
Beverly Reid O’Connell, presiding
Alexander F. MacKinnon, referral
Date filed: 04/14/2016
Date terminated: 08/05/2016
Date of last filing: 08/08/2016

History

 

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
21
Filed & Entered:   08/08/2016
Docket Text Notice of Appeal to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
20
Filed & Entered:   08/05/2016
Docket Text Order on Motion to Dismiss
19
Filed & Entered:   07/25/2016
Docket Text Reply (Motion related)
16
Filed & Entered:   07/18/2016
Docket Text Objection/Opposition (Motion related)
17
Filed & Entered:   07/18/2016
Docket Text Objection/Opposition (Motion related)
18
Filed & Entered:   07/18/2016
Docket Text Proof of Service (subsequent documents)
14
Filed & Entered:   06/10/2016
Terminated: 08/05/2016
Docket Text Motion to Dismiss (cause or other)
15
Filed & Entered:   06/10/2016
Docket Text Request for Judicial Notice
13
Filed & Entered:   05/11/2016
Docket Text Stipulation Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less)
12
Filed & Entered:   04/27/2016
Docket Text Service of Summons and Complaint Returned Executed (21 days)
11
Filed & Entered:   04/20/2016
Docket Text Summons Issued (Attorney Civil Case Opening)
4
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Notice of Assignment to United States Judges(CV-18) – optional html form
5
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Notice to Parties of Court-Directed ADR Program (ADR-8) – optional html form
6
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Initial Order upon Filing of Complaint – form only
7
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Request to Issue Summons
8
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Deficiency in Attorney Case Opening – optional html form
9
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties
10
Filed & Entered:   04/18/2016
Docket Text Summons Request
1
Filed & Entered:   04/14/2016
Docket Text Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening)
2
Filed & Entered:   04/14/2016
Docket Text Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71)
3
Filed & Entered:   04/14/2016
Docket Text Summons Request

 

Share