K.J.P. v. San Diego, County of ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 K.J.P., a minor, and K.P.P., a minor, Case No.: 3:15-cv-02692-H-MDD individually, by and through their mother, 13 LOAN THI MINH NGUYEN, who also ORDER: 14 sues individually and as successor in interest to her now deceased husband, ORDER REGARDING 15 Lucky Phounsy, SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING 16 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ 17 v. EX PARTE MOTION TO EXPEDITE 18 RULING ON DEFENDANTS’ COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO; RICHARD MOTION FOR JUDGMENT 19 FISCHER, PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULES 20 Defendants. OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 50(a) AND 50(b) 21 22 [Doc. No. 412.] 23 24 On August 30, 2021, Defendants filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law 25 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a). (Doc. No. 354.) On September 12, 2021, 26 Defendants filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 27 Procedure 50(b). (Doc. No. 386.) On September 13, 2021, Plaintiffs filed their response in 28 opposition to Defendants’ Rule 50(a) motion. (Doc. No. 388.) On September 16, 2021, 1 || Plaintiffs filed their response in opposition to Defendants’ Rule 50(b) motion. (Doc. No. 2 397.) On September 30, 2021, Defendants filed their replies in support of their Rule 50(a) 3 ||motion, (Doc. No. 409), and Rule 50(b) motion. (Doc. No. 408.) On October 18, 2021, 4 Defendants filed an ex parte motion for the Court to expedite its ruling on Defendants’ 5 50(a) and 50(b) motions. (Doc. No. 412.) 6 On October 18, 2021, the Supreme Court of the United States issued opinions in City 7 || of Tahlequah, Oklahoma v. Bond, 595 U.S. ___ (2021) and Rivas- Villegas v. Cortesluna, 8 1/595 U.S.___ (2021). The parties are to file briefings on the effect, if any, the opinions have 9 Defendants’ pending Rule 50(a) and Rule 50(b) motions (Doc. Nos. 354, 386.) 10 || Defendants’ brief is due on or before Friday, October 22, 2021. Plaintiffs’ opposition 11 || brief is due on or before Friday, October 29, 2021. Defendants should not file a reply brief 12 absent further order from the Court. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(h), briefs must not 13 exceed twenty-five (25) pages in length without leave of the Court. Briefs exceeding ten 14 ||(10) pages in length must have a table of contents and a table of authorities cited. 15 In light of the requested additional briefing, the Court denies Defendants’ motion for 16 || an expedited ruling on their Rule 50(a) and Rule 50(b) motions. (Doc. No. 412.) 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 || DATED: October 19, 2021 } / | ) | | □ 19 MAAL-YV\ Le HHL A MARILYN I HUFF, DistrictUfdke 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28