Free Proposed Order - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cv-02705-JSW

Document 39

Filed 09/05/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
MURRAY & HOWARD, LLP
436 14th Street, Suite 1413 Oakland, CA 94612 Tel. (510) 444-2660 Fax (510) 444-2522

Gilmur R. Murray (SBN 111856) [email protected] Derek G. Howard (SBN 118082) [email protected] MURRAY & HOWARD, LLP 436 14th Street, Suite 1413 Oakland, California 94612 Telephone: (510) 444-2660 Facsimile: (510) 444-2522 Joseph W. Cotchett (SBN 36324) [email protected] Niall P. McCarthy (SBN 160175) [email protected] Laura Schlichtmann (SBN 169699) [email protected] COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY 840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 Burlingame, California 94010 Telephone: (650) 697-6000 Facsimile: (650) 697-0577 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ELLEN STOODY-BROSER, an Individual, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., and BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION Defendants.

Case No. C 08-02705 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFNDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS Date: October 31, 2008 Time: 9:00a.m. Place: Courtroom 2, 17th Floor Complaint Filed: May 29, 2008 Honorable Jeffrey S. White

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS CASE NO. 08-02705

Case 3:08-cv-02705-JSW

Document 39

Filed 09/05/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
MURRAY & HOWARD, LLP
436 14th Street, Suite 1413 Oakland, CA 94612 Tel. (510) 444-2660 Fax (510) 444-2522

The Court has reviewed the Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition to the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, including the legal authorities cited therein. The Court rules as follows: Judicial notice may be taken of the existence of documents filed in any federal or state court because their existence is not susceptible to reasonable dispute. See Robert E. Jones et al., RUTTER GROUP PRACTICE GUIDE: FEDERAL CIVIL TRIALS AND EVIDENCE, § 8:875 (2007). This includes both records filed previously in the current litigation and recorded in other proceedings. See, e.g., United States ex. rel. Robinson Rancheria Citizens Council v. Borneo, Inc., 971 F.2d 244, 248 (9th Cir. 1992) ("[W]e may take notice of proceedings in other courts, both within and without the federal judicial system, if those proceedings have a direct relation to matters at issue."). Federal courts may take judicial notice of guidelines, manuals, and rules of federal and state governmental agencies. See Lockyer v. County of Santa Cruz, 2006 WL 3086706, at *3 n.3 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2006) (granting judicial notice of US DOJ checklist for polling places, available on US DOJ website); Kothmann Enters., Inc. v. Trinity Industries, Inc., 455 F. Supp. 2d 608, 929 (S.D. Tex. 2006) (taking judicial notice of USPTO Manual on Patent Examining Procedure); Driebel v. City of Milwaukee, 298 F.3d 622, 631 n.2 (7th Cir. 2002) (taking judicial notice of a police department manual containing rules and regulations promulgated by the chief of police); Gleave v. Graham, 954 F. Supp. 599, 605 (W.D.N.Y. 1997) (taking judicial notice of Bureau of Prisons' office internal agency guidelines). The documents identified by Plaintiff meet these criteria. Having found good cause as being shown, IT IS ORDERED as follows: Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September ____, 2008 ______________________________________ HONORABLE JEFFREY S. WHITE

1 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS CASE NO. 08-02705