STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT ON COUNTY DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT

EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.

Plaintiff Michael Gressett and Defendants Robert Kochly; Paul Sequeira; Brian Baker; Gene Greenwald; Darryl Jackson and Paul Mulligan ("the County Defendants") respectfully request that this Court issue an order for an enlargement of the page limit for County Defendants' argument in support of their Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff's argument in support of his Opposition to Summary Judgment.

County Defendants have made a good faith effort to streamline their argument. However, because of the many issues involved in this case and the size of the record, the argument in support Defendants' memorandum in support of their motion will exceed 25 pages.

The Court previously permitted County Defendants to file arguments in support of their motions to dismiss Plaintiff's Second and Third Amended Complaints of up to 35 pages.

The parties, recognizing the complexity of the issues raised in this case and the size of the record, hereby stipulate, by and through their respective undersigned counsel, as follows:

1. On or before December 18, 2014, County Defendants will file their Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, together with supporting memoranda of points and authorities and appropriate supporting documents with this court. County Defendants may file an oversized memorandum not to exceed forty (40) pages in length.

2. On or before January 12, 2015, Plaintiff will file a memorandum of points and authorities in opposition to County Defendants' motion for summary judgment not to exceed forty (40) pages in length.

3. With the filing of this Stipulation, the parties request that the Court enter an order approving the Stipulation.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Having read the foregoing Stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the County Defendants be permitted to file arguments in support of the motion for summary judgment of up to 40 pages and that Plaintiff be given permission to file argument in opposition to the motion for summary judgment of up to 40 pages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.