Case 8:12-cv-01137-CBM-AJW Document 55

Filed 10/11/12 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:1147

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. Title CV12-01137 CBM (AJWx) Aranas, et al. v. Napolitano, et al. Date October 11, 2012

Present: The Honorable

CONSUELO B. MARSHALL Joseph M. Levario Deputy Clerk n/a Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Defendants: n/a

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: n/a

Proceedings:

IN CHAMBERS/OFF THE RECORD ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF PAGE LIMIT; EX PARTE APPLICATION OF INTERVENOR-DEFENDANT FOR LEAVE TO FILE TWO SEPARATE LEGAL MEMORANDA, EACH IN EXCESS OF 25 PAGES; AND PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE INTERVENORS MOTION TO DISMISS [Docket Nos. 49, 50, and 52]

The matters before the Court are (1) Defendants Ex Parte Application for Enlargement of Page Limit (Defendants Application) [Docket No. 49]; (2) the Ex Parte Application of IntervenorDefendant For Leave to File Two Separate Legal Memoranda, Each in Excess of 25 Pages (BLAGs Application) [Docket No. 50]; and (3) Plaintiffs Ex Parte Application to Continue Intervenors Motion to Dismiss (Plaintiffs Application) [Docket No. 52.] The first and third matters appear to be the respective parties responses to the second matter and the Court will thus deal with all three matters together. The second matter is BLAGs Application seeking leave to file a 44-page Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives (BLAG) Motion to Dismiss and a 49-page Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction.1 [Docket No. 50.] BLAGs Application argues that [t]he length of each memoranda is a function of the importance of the constitutional issues at stake in this litigation; the complexity of the relevant factual, procedural, and legal background; the intricacies of the relevant immigration laws, regulations, and procedures; and the significant volume of constitutional analysis that is relevant to the issues presented . . .. In response, Defendants Application seeks leave to file an Opposition to the [BLAG] Motion to Dismiss . . . that is no more than 35 pages in length. [Docket No. 49.] Plaintiffs in turn request that the Court either continu[e] hearing on [BLAGs] motion to dismiss . .
1

The balance of BLAGs Application is addressed in a separate Order.

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 2

CV-90 (10/08)

Case 8:12-cv-01137-CBM-AJW Document 55

Filed 10/11/12 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:1148

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. Title CV12-01137 CBM (AJWx) Aranas, et al. v. Napolitano, et al. Date October 11, 2012

.until after the Court has ruled on defendants pending motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, until 30 days following either the Courts granting BLAG leave to file an oversize brief or BLAGs filing a brief in support of its motion to dismiss within the page limit fixed by Local Rule 11-6. [Docket No. 52.] Having reviewed the parties papers, the Court denies in part and grants in part Defendants Application, BLAGs Application, and Plaintiffs Application. BLAG shall file on or before October 22, 2012 a Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of its Motion to Dismiss that is no more than 30 pages in length, excluding exhibits and indices. Defendants and Plaintiffs shall file their Oppositions to BLAGs Motion to Dismiss on or before October 30, 2012 and each Opposition shall be no more than 30 pages in length, excluding exhibits and indices. BLAG shall file its Reply, if any, on or before November 6, 2012. Argument on BLAGs Motion to Dismiss, Defendants Partial Motion to Dismiss, and Plaintiffs Motions for Preliminary Injunction and Class Certification will be heard on November 20, 2012 at 10AM. The November 6, 2012 hearings are hereby vacated. IT IS SO ORDERED.

00 Initials of Preparer JL

00

CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 2