Case: 19-56004, 12/24/2019, ID: 11543790, DktEntry: 19, Page 1 of 6

Case No. 19-56004

In the United States Court of Appeals

for the Ninth Circuit

STEVEN RUPP, et al.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.
XAVIER BECERRA, in his official capacity as
Attorney General of the State of California,
Defendant-Appellee.

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California
(CV 00746-JLS-JDE)

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE

APPELLANT’S OPENING BRIEF

C. D. Michel
Sean A. Brady
Matthew Cubeiro
MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
180 East Ocean Blvd., Suite 200
Long Beach, CA 90802
(562) 216-4444
cmichel@michellawyers.com
Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellants
 Case: 19-56004, 12/24/2019, ID: 11543790, DktEntry: 19, Page 2 of 6

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26(b) and Ninth Circuit Rule

31-2.2(b), Appellants Steven Rupp et. al. move for a 21-day extension of time,

through and including January 27, 2020, to file their opening brief. Appellant’s

Opening Brief is currently scheduled to be filed on or before January 6, 2020. (Brady

Decl. ¶ 2.) For the reasons set forth herein and attested to in the supporting

declaration of Sean A. Brady, Appellants have good cause for an extension of that

deadline. Appellee does not oppose this request. (Brady Decl. ¶ 3.)

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26(b) provides that for “good cause, the

court may extend the time prescribed by these rules….” (Fed. R. App. P. 26.) The

Ninth Circuit Rules specify that when (as here) a streamlined extension has already

been granted pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 31-2.2(a), a written motion for an

additional extension of time is required, which must be accompanied by a declaration

attesting to the basis for good cause and submitted at least 7 days before expiration of

the time to file the brief at issue. Ninth Circuit Rule 31-2(b). This motion is timely

and the required declaration is filed concurrently with this motion.

On December 23, 2019, the United States Supreme Court distributed the

matter of David Seth Worman, et al. v. Maura T. Healey, Attorney General Of Massachusetts,

et al., Sup. Ct. Case No. 19-404, for its January 10, 2019 conference. Worman involves

a Second Amendment challenge to a Massachusetts law banning the acquisition and

possession of arms it categorizes as “assault weapons.” (Brady Decl. ¶ 3.) The instant

appeal involves a Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapon

1
 Case: 19-56004, 12/24/2019, ID: 11543790, DktEntry: 19, Page 3 of 6

Control Act because it bans most, if not all, of the same firearms at issue in Worman.

(Brady Decl. ¶ 7.) As such, if the Supreme Court grants certiorari in Worman at its

January 10 conference, the result could have a tremendous, if not dispositive, bearing

on the instant appeal.

The potential for the Worman matter to dispositively impact the instant appeal

mere days after Appellants’ opening brief is currently due to be filed in this matter,

makes it impractical for Appellants to file their opening brief by the current deadline

of January 6, 2020. Given the good cause shown, as well as the brevity of the

extension, and the fact that Appellee does not oppose the extension (Brady Decl. ¶ 3),

this request is made in good faith and not for the purpose of delay. It is also in the

interests of all parties and this Court to extend the time to file briefs. Awaiting the

Supreme Court’s decision to hear Worman could aid the Court and preserve its and the

parties’ resources by avoiding the potential for supplemental briefing.

Appellant thus requests that this Court grant a 21-day extension, through and

including January 27, 2020, for Appellant to file his opening brief. Alternatively,

Appellant requests an extension for a period of time the Court deems appropriate.

Date: December 24, 2019 MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

s/ Sean A. Brady
Sean A. Brady
Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellants

2
 Case: 19-56004, 12/24/2019, ID: 11543790, DktEntry: 19, Page 4 of 6

DECLARATION OF SEAN A. BRADY

I, Sean A. Brady, declare:

1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice in the State of California

and before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. I am an attorney at Michel &
Associates, P.C., counsel of record for Plaintiffs-Appellants Steven Rupp, et al. I have

personal knowledge of the facts set forth here and if called as a witness I could and
would completely testify as to them.
2. Appellants’ Opening Brief is currently due on or before January 6, 2020.

3. On or about December 23, 2019, I e-mailed counsel for Defendants-

Appellees, Messrs. Peter Chang and John D. Echeverria, asking whether the Attorney
General would oppose Appellants’ request for an extension of time to file their

opening brief. Later that day, Mr. Chang responded with a phone call, confirming that
the Attorney General would not oppose this motion to the extent it sought a 21-day
extension, for the purpose of seeing what transpires at the Supreme Court’s January
10 conference concerning David Seth Worman, et al. v. Maura T. Healey, Attorney General
Of Massachusetts, et al., Sup. Ct. Case No. 19-404. Mr. Chang review this motion on
December 24, 2019, and confirmed the Attorney General does not oppose.
4. Appellants have previously asked for and received an extension of time
to file Appellants’ Opening Brief and Excerpts of Record. The Opening Brief was
originally due on December 5, 2019, but Appellants received a Streamlined extension
pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 31-2.2(a), moving the deadline to January 6, 2020.
5. This motion is made in good faith for the reasons of actual need set
forth below and not for the purpose of delay. I have exercised and will continue to

3
 Case: 19-56004, 12/24/2019, ID: 11543790, DktEntry: 19, Page 5 of 6

exercise diligence in managing this appeal and in preparing Appellant’s Opening Brief
and Excerpts of Record so they may be timely filed on or before the January 27, 2020

deadline sought in this request.

6. I am the attorney primarily responsible for managing this case and
preparing Appellant’s Opening Brief and Excerpts of Record.

7. On December 23, 2019, I became aware that the United States Supreme
Court distributed Worman v. Healey (No. 19-404) for its Conference of January 10,
20201. As Worman deals with nearly identical issues as those raised in Appellants’

appeal, whether the Supreme Court grants certiorari could have tremendous bearing
on the instant appeal. As such, it would be in the best interest of all parties as well as
this Court to wait and see if the United States Supreme Court grants certiorari in the

Worman matter, especially considering the delay will be minimal and therefore will not
prejudice Appellee, who does not oppose Appellants’ extension request.
8. To my knowledge, the court reporter is not currently in default with
regard to any designated transcripts.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on December 24, 2019 at
Long Beach, California.

s/ Sean A. Brady
Sean A. Brady
Declarant

1
The docket can be found online here:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/DocketFiles/html/P
ublic/19-404.html.
4
 Case: 19-56004, 12/24/2019, ID: 11543790, DktEntry: 19, Page 6 of 6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 24, 2019, an electronic PDF of MOTION

TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE APPELLANT’S OPENING BRIEF AND

EXCERPTS OF RECORD was uploaded to the Court’s CM/ECF system, which will

automatically generate and send by electronic mail a Notice of Docket Activity to all

registered attorneys participating in the case. Such notice constitutes service on those

registered attorneys.

Date: December 24, 2019 MICHEL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

s/ Sean A. Brady
Sean A. Brady
Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellants