Case: Newsom v. Trump

3:25-cv-04870 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: June 9, 2025

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case challenged the federal deployment of the California National Guard to protect federal property and immigration officials from protesters in Los Angeles and the surrounding area. On June 9, 2025, Governor Gavin Newsom and the State of California filed suit in the Northern District of North California, challenging recent actions by President Trump in deploying the National Guard in the Los Angeles area. On June 6, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers carried out multiple enforcement actions in and around Los Angeles, leading to the arrest of around 44 persons with 70-80 people detained. The same day as the arrests, crowds gathered at the federal courthouse in Los Angeles to protest the Trump Administration and its immigration agenda. The complaint alleged that, while some protestors engaged in violence against property and law enforcement, the majority were peaceful and non-violent. Protests continued on June 7 and June 8.

The complaint alleged that Los Angeles police and sheriffs had responded to the protests and had dispersed several crowds at various places during the three days of protests. However, on the evening of June 7, despite a message on social media by Gavin Newsom stating that it was unnecessary, President Trump issued a memorandum that said because of "numerous incidents of violence and disorder" that had taken place in response to ICE actions, he was calling into service members of the National Guard. Under 10 U.S.C. § 12406, the President is allowed to call out the National Guard if one of three conditions is met: (1) the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation; (2) there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or (3) the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.

Citing this statute, President Trump authorized the Secretary of Defense to (1) "coordinate with the Governors of the States and the National Guard Bureau in identifying and ordering into Federal service the appropriate members and units of the National Guard under this authority,” (2) call out up to 2,000 National Guard personnel for up to 60 days, and (3) use them to perform protective activities for the protection of federal personnel and property.

That same evening, Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defense, sent a memorandum to the Adjutant General of California, who commands the California National Guard under the Governor. Relying on President Trump's memo, and without the consent of the Governor, Secretary Hegseth called into service 2,000 members of the California National Guard for 60 days of service. Control of the Guard members was handed over to the General of the U.S. Northern Command, and the Guard began to arrive in Los Angeles on June 8. On June 9, Secretary Hegseth called into federal service another 2,000 Guard members, again without the consent of the California Governor.

Represented by the State's Attorney General, the plaintiffs sued President Trump, the Secretary of Defense, and the Department of Defense. The plaintiffs alleged that the President's and the agency's actions were ultra vires and exceeded the scope of their authority under 10 U.S.C. § 12406 and the Posse Comitatus Act. The plaintiffs also alleged that the defendants violated the Tenth Amendment and Article I, § 8 of the Constitution. Finally, the plaintiffs alleged that the agency's action violated the Administrative Procedure Act. Therefore, the plaintiffs asked the court to declare President Trump's memo, and both of Secretary Hegseth's orders relying on it, to be unlawful, to enjoin the Department of Defense from deploying the National Guard, and to award court costs.

The case was assigned to Judge Charles R. Breyer. On June 10, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO), asking the court to maintain the status quo "by temporarily enjoining Defendants from ordering or deploying the active-duty members of the military and federalized National Guard soldiers to patrol communities or otherwise engage in general law enforcement activities beyond the immediate vicinity of federal buildings or other federal real property." The court scheduled a hearing on the plaintiffs' motion for June 12.

The district court issued a TRO ordering the return of control of the California National Guard to the State, holding the case justiciable and concluding that the statutory prerequisites for federalization under 10 U.S.C. § 12406 were not met. The court found no rebellion, rejected the government’s argument that partial obstacles or generalized risk satisfied the statute’s requirement that the President be “unable” to execute the laws, and held that the federalization orders failed to comply with § 12406’s requirement that they issue through the Governor. The court also concluded that the unlawful federalization likely violated the Tenth Amendment by interfering with the State’s police powers, but stayed its order briefly to allow an appeal. 2025 WL 1663345

The government appealed on June 12, 2025, and the Ninth Circuit granted an administrative stay that evening. While agreeing that the case was judicially reviewable, the court of appeals held that review under § 12406 is highly deferential and concluded that the government was likely to prevail, finding that the statute does not require complete incapacity to execute the laws and that sufficient interference with federal operations supported the President’s determination. The court also held that the statute’s procedural requirement was likely satisfied because the federalization order was transmitted through the state adjutant general acting in the Governor’s name, and it set an expedited briefing schedule for the appeal. 2025 WL 1712930

On September 2, 2025, the district court held that defendants had violated the Posse Comitatus Act and entered injunctive relief, finding that federalized National Guard units engaged in prohibited law enforcement activities in Los Angeles pursuant to a top-down directive and that § 12406 did not create an exception to the Act. The court enjoined further use of the National Guard to execute domestic law, stayed the injunction until September 12, and entered judgment for plaintiffs on the Posse Comitatus Act claims. 2025 WL 2501619.

Also on September 2, plaintiffs moved to enjoin an August 5, 2025 order extending the federalization of 300 Guard members; the government appealed, and on September 4, 2025, the Ninth Circuit granted an administrative stay to preserve the status quo pending further review. 2025 WL 2501619.

On September 9, 2025, the district court stayed all proceedings related to Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction challenging Secretary Hegseth’s August 5, 2025 order extending the federalization of approximately 300 California National Guard members. The court concluded that, given the fragmented procedural posture of the case and the Ninth Circuit’s pending review of closely related issues arising from the earlier federalization orders, it was uncertain whether jurisdiction over the motion properly lay with the district court or the court of appeals.

On October 22, 2025, the Ninth Circuit denied rehearing en banc, leaving in place the panel’s June 19, 2025 stay order allowing continued federalization of the California National Guard pending appeal. The court’s decision reflects the view that presidential determinations under 10 U.S.C. § 12406 are subject to highly deferential judicial review and that, at least at the stay stage, the President need not be completely unable to enforce federal law before invoking the statute.

On October 29, 2025, the Ninth Circuit denied as unnecessary Plaintiffs’ motion for injunctive relief, holding that the district court retained jurisdiction to consider Plaintiffs’ challenge to Secretary Hegseth’s August 5, 2025 order extending the federalization of approximately 300 California National Guard members. The court explained that although an interlocutory appeal divests a district court of jurisdiction over aspects of a case involved in the appeal, it does not bar the district court from proceeding on distinct issues not before the appellate court.

After the Ninth Circuit clarified that the district court retained jurisdiction over challenges to later federalization orders, Judge Charles Breyer lifted the stay on November 4, 2025, and set an expedited briefing schedule for Plaintiffs’ renewed motion for a preliminary injunction challenging Secretary Hegseth’s August 5, 2025 order extending the federalization of approximately 300 California National Guard members. The court emphasized that the renewed motion should account for post-September developments, including the transfer of federalized California Guard members to Oregon and Illinois.

Plaintiffs filed their renewed motion on November 13, 2025, arguing that continued federalization and deployment of the National Guard in and around Los Angeles lacked any lawful basis under 10 U.S.C. § 12406. They contended that even if isolated violence in June justified the initial deployment, that exigency had long since dissipated, and § 12406 does not authorize indefinite or geographically untethered military deployments based on speculative future risk. Plaintiffs further argued that the statute requires a present inability to execute the laws using regular forces, not merely a residual risk of interference, and that continued federalization therefore violates both § 12406 and the Tenth Amendment.

On December 10, 2025, Judge Breyer granted Plaintiffs’ renewed motion for a preliminary injunction, enjoining the Trump Administration’s continued federalization of California National Guard troops under 10 U.S.C. § 12406. The court held that both the August 5 and October 16, 2025 federalization orders were judicially reviewable and likely unlawful because the statutory preconditions for federalization were no longer met. Specifically, the court found no colorable basis to conclude that the President was presently “unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States,” emphasizing that the June protests had long subsided, ICE operations were proceeding without meaningful interference, and most Guard members had already been withdrawn without incident. The court rejected the government’s argument that once an initial federalization is valid, all subsequent extensions are unreviewable, warning that such a theory would permit indefinite federal control of state militias and undermine federalism and separation-of-powers principles. Applying even the Ninth Circuit’s highly deferential standard, the court concluded that the continued deployment rested on speculative future risks rather than a present exigency and therefore exceeded the President’s delegated authority under § 12406. Accordingly, the court ordered the return of control of the remaining federalized California National Guard members to the Governor and enjoined further deployments absent a new, legally sufficient justification. 2025 WL 3533818.

The government filed a notice of appeal on December 11, 2025, and moved for an emergency stay pending appeal. On December 12, 2025, a Ninth Circuit motions panel granted an administrative stay in part, temporarily staying only the portion of the district court’s order directing the return of control of the California National Guard to Governor Newsom, while leaving the remainder of the injunction in effect. The panel emphasized that the administrative stay was intended solely to preserve the status quo and did not reflect any view on the merits.

On December 17, 2025, at the district court, Judge Breyer entered a stipulated order extending the briefing schedule on Defendants’ pending motion to dismiss. The court ordered Plaintiffs to file their opposition by January 20, 2026, and Defendants to file their reply by February 3, 2026.

On December 23, 2025, the Ninth Circuit ordered the government to file a supplemental brief addressing whether the partial administrative stay should be lifted in light of Trump v. Illinois, and set an expedited supplemental briefing schedule.

On December 30, 2025, the government filed a supplemental brief stating that it did not oppose lifting the partial administrative stay and withdrew its motion for a stay pending appeal.

On December 31, 2025, the Ninth Circuit vacated the administrative stay in full, leaving the district court’s December 10 preliminary injunction fully operative and requiring the return of remaining California National Guard members to state control. That same day, President Trump publicly announced that he would abandon efforts to deploy National Guard troops over the objections of state officials in California, Illinois, and Oregon, signaling a broader retreat from contested federalization efforts following adverse court rulings.

On January 12, the parties filed in the district court a stipulated motion to stay deadlines on the motion to dismiss briefing in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. Illinois, pending further guidance from appellate court in Newsom v. Trump and Oregon v. Trump.

The case is ongoing.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Jeremiah Price (6/25/2025)

Clearinghouse (1/16/2026)

Michael Vandergriff (1/2/2026)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
1 3:25-cv-04870	Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief	June 9, 2025	June 9, 2025 Complaint
12 3:25-cv-04870	Defendants' Notice Regarding Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order	June 10, 2025	June 10, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief
8 3:25-cv-04870	Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order	June 10, 2025	June 10, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief
25 3:25-cv-04870	Defendants' Corrected Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order	June 11, 2025	June 11, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief
64 3:25-cv-04870	Order Granting Plaintiffs' Application for Temporary Restraining Order	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 Order/Opinion 786 F.Supp.3d 1235
77 3:25-cv-04870	Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction	June 16, 2025	June 16, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief
32 25-03727	Order U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit	June 19, 2025	June 19, 2025 Order/Opinion 141 F.4th 1032
56 25-03727	Brief for Appellants Newsom v. Trump et al. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit	July 22, 2025	July 22, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief
176 3:25-cv-04870	Opinion Granting Injunctive Relief Newsom et al. v. Trump et al.	Sept. 2, 2025	Sept. 2, 2025 Order/Opinion
182 3:25-cv-04870	Judgment Newsom et al. v. Trump et al.	Sept. 2, 2025	Sept. 2, 2025 Order/Opinion

show / hide documents

Resources

Title	Description		External URL Date / External URL
Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions Donald Trump	This memorandum for the Secretary of Defense outlines President Trump's call for Federal service members and units of the National Guard to protect U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) unit…	June 7, 2025	June 7, 2025 https://www.whitehouse.gov/...
10 U.S. Code § 12406 - National Guard in Federal service: call 10 U.S. Code § 12406	10 U.S. Code § 12406 outlines the President of the United States authority to call members of the National Guard to repel invasion, suppress a rebellion, or execute the laws of the United States.	Oct. 5, 1994	Oct. 5, 1994 https://www.law.cornell.edu/...

show / hide resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70496361/newsom-v-trump/

Last updated March 5, 2026, 12:37 p.m.

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
49	ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 40 Motion for Pro Hac Vice, Norman Eisen. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
50	First MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice Joshua Kolb ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-20781137.) filed by Democracy Defenders Fund. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Certificate of Good Standing)(Kolb, Joshua) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025) 1 Supplement Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
51	ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION Yes filed by CITY OF LOS ANGELES, on its own behalf and on behalf of the People of the State of California. Responses due by 6/16/2025. (Attachments: # 1 Brief of The City of Los Angeles as AMICUS CURIAE in Support of Plaintiffs, # 2 [Proposed] Order Granting Administrative Motion for Leave to File Brief of AMICUS CURIAE The City of Los Angeles in Support of Plaintiffs)(Dundas, Michael) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025) 1 Brief of The City of Los Angeles as AMICUS CURIAE in Support of Plaintiffs View on RECAP 2 [Proposed] Order Granting Administrative Motion for Leave to File Brief of AMIC View on RECAP	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
52	ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION Yes filed by CITY OF LOS ANGELES, on its own behalf and on behalf of the People of the State of California. Responses due by 6/16/2025. (Attachments: # 1 Brief of The City of Los Angeles as AMICUS CURIAE in Support of Plaintiffs, # 2 [Proposed] Order Granting Administrative Motion for Leave to File Brief of AMICUS CURIAE The City of Los Angeles in Support of Plaintiffs)(Dundas, Michael) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025) 1 Brief of The City of Los Angeles as AMICUS CURIAE in Support of Plaintiffs View on RECAP 2 [Proposed] Order Granting Administrative Motion for Leave to File Brief of AMIC View on RECAP	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
53	First MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief filed by Arman Matevosyan. Motion Hearing set for 6/12/2025 01:30 PM in San Francisco, - Videoconference Only before Judge Charles R. Breyer. Responses due by 6/26/2025. Replies due by 7/3/2025. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Declaration of Arman Matevosyan In Support of Ex Parte Application, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit 1 - Proposed Amicus Memorandum)(Matevosyan, Arman) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025) 1 Declaration Declaration of Arman Matevosyan In Support of Ex Parte Application View on RECAP 2 Exhibit Exhibit 1 - Proposed Amicus Memorandum View on RECAP	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
54	NOTICE by Former U.S. Army and Navy Secretaries and Retired Four-Star Admirals and Generals / Notice of Errata in Amici Curiae's Motion for Leave to File Amici Curiae Brief [ECF 31] (Craig, Matthew) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
55	ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 50 Motion for Pro Hac Vice, Joshua Kolb. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
56	ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 51 Administrative Motion. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
57	ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 52 Administrative Motion. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
58	ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE APPLICATION OF AMICUS CURIAE ARMAN MATEVOSYAN ESQ., A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS BRIEF by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 53 Motion to File Amicus Curiae Brief. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
59	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Charles R. Breyer: Motion Hearing held on 6/12/2025 - Re 8 First Ex Parte Application Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order filed by State of California, Gavin Newsom. Motion taken under submission. The Court will issue an order. (Total Time in Court: 1 Hour and 9 Minutes) Court Reporter: April Brott. Plaintiff Attorney: Nicholas Reiss Green, Nicholas D. Espiritu, Megan Richards, Meghan Strong. Defendant Attorney: Brett Shumate, Christopher Edelman. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (ls, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025
60	TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on 6/12/2025 before Judge Charles R. Breyer by Non-Party, for Court Reporter April Brott. (Najafi, Afshin) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
61	TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on 6/12/2025 before Judge Charles R. Breyer by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense, for Court Reporter April Brott. (Hartlieb, Garry) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
62	TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on 6/12/2025 before Judge Charles R. Breyer by Gavin Newsom, State of California, for Court Reporter April Brott. (Malouff, Marissa) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
63	Transcript of Proceedings held on June 12, 2025, before Judge Charles Breyer. Court Reporter/Transcriber April Wood Brott, telephone number 510-225-8350 april_brott@cand.uscourts.gov. Per General Order No. 59 and Judicial Conference policy, this transcript may be viewed only at the Clerk's Office public terminal or may be purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber until the deadline for the Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction, if required, is due no later than 5 business days from date of this filing. (Re 61 Transcript Order ) Release of Transcript Restriction set for 9/10/2025. (Related documents(s) 61 ) (Brott, April) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025
64	Order by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 8 Ex Parte Application.(crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 Clearinghouse
65	NOTICE OF APPEAL to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals filed by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. Appeal of Order on Ex Parte Application 64 (Appeal fee FEE WAIVED.) (Hartlieb, Garry) (Filed on 6/12/2025) (Entered: 06/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025 RECAP
	Notice of Appearance/Substitution/Change/Withdrawal of Attorney	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025
	Motion Hearing	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025
	Set/Reset Hearings AND ~Util - Teleconference Zoom	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025
	Set/Reset Hearing - Re 64 Order on Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order. Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 6/20/2025 at 10:00 AM. This proceeding will be held in open court. Any party, members of the public, media wishing to appear by Zoom may do so. Note there is a 1,000 participant limit on Zoom. Webinar Access: All counsel, members of the public, and media may access the webinar information at https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/crb Court Appearances: Advanced notice is required of counsel or parties who wish to be identified by the court as making an appearance or will be participating in the argument at the hearing. A list of names and emails must be sent to the CRD at crbcrd@cand.uscourts.gov no later than June 18, 2025 at 3:00 PM PST.General Order 58. Persons granted access to court proceedings held by telephone or videoconference are reminded that photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings, including screenshots or other visual copying of a hearing, is absolutely prohibited.Zoom Guidance and Setup: https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/zoom/. Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 6/20/2025 10:00 AM. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2025)	June 12, 2025	June 12, 2025
66	MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-20784981.) filed by Former U.S. Army and Navy Secretaries and Retired Four-Star Admirals and Generals. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit Colorado Certificate of Good Standing)(Tremitiere, Beau) (Filed on 6/13/2025) 1 Exhibit Colorado Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP	June 13, 2025	June 13, 2025 RECAP
67	MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number ACANDC-20785357.) filed by Former U.S. Army and Navy Secretaries and Retired Four-Star Admirals and Generals. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit DC Certificate of Good Standing)(Parker, Kristy) (Filed on 6/13/2025) 1 Exhibit DC Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP	June 13, 2025	June 13, 2025 RECAP
68	NOTICE of Appearance filed by Meghan Strong on behalf of Gavin Newsom, State of California (Strong, Meghan) (Filed on 6/13/2025)	June 13, 2025	June 13, 2025
69	NOTICE by Gavin Newsom, State of California of Posting (Stanley, James) (Filed on 6/13/2025)	June 13, 2025	June 13, 2025 RECAP
70	ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting [66] Motion for Pro Hac Vice, Beau Tremitiere. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/13/2025)	June 13, 2025	June 13, 2025 RECAP
71	ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting [67] Motion for Pro Hac Vice, Kristy Parker. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/13/2025)	June 13, 2025	June 13, 2025 RECAP
72	ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION BRIEFING SCHEDULE filed by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. Responses due by 6/16/2025. (Attachments: # (1) Declaration of Benjamin Kurland, # (2) Proposed Order)(Kurland, Benjamin) (Filed on 6/13/2025) 1 Declaration of Benjamin Kurland View on RECAP 2 Proposed Order View on RECAP	June 13, 2025	June 13, 2025 RECAP
73	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re [72] ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION BRIEFING SCHEDULE ) filed byGavin Newsom, State of California. (Espiritu, Nicholas) (Filed on 6/13/2025)	June 13, 2025	June 13, 2025 RECAP
	Notice of Appearance/Substitution/Change/Withdrawal of Attorney	June 13, 2025	June 13, 2025
74	ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer denying [72] Administrative Motion. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/14/2025)	June 14, 2025	June 14, 2025 RECAP
75	NOTICE of Appearance filed by Jane Reilley on behalf of Gavin Newsom, State of California (Reilley, Jane) (Filed on 6/16/2025)	June 16, 2025	June 16, 2025
76	STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Increase Page Limits filed by Gavin Newsom, State of California. (Attachments: # (1) Proposed Order Proposed Order to Increase Page Limits)(Strong, Meghan) (Filed on 6/16/2025) 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order to Increase Page Limits View on RECAP	June 16, 2025	June 16, 2025 RECAP
77	First MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Gavin Newsom, State of California. Motion Hearing set for 6/20/2025 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 06, 17th Floor before Judge Charles R. Breyer. Responses due by 6/18/2025. Replies due by 6/19/2025. (Attachments: # (1) Declaration Declaration Meghan H. Strong in support of Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, # (2) Declaration Declaration of Paul S. Eck in support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction, # (3) Declaration Declaration of Joseph Zizi, # (4) Declaration Declaration of Diego Alejandro Arp, # (5) Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Preliminary Injunction)(Strong, Meghan) (Filed on 6/16/2025) 1 Declaration Declaration Meghan H. Strong in support of Plaintiff's Motion f View on RECAP 2 Declaration Declaration of Paul S. Eck in support of Motion for Preliminary Inju View on RECAP 3 Declaration Declaration of Joseph Zizi View on RECAP 4 Declaration Declaration of Diego Alejandro Arp View on RECAP 5 Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Preliminary Injunction View on RECAP	June 16, 2025	June 16, 2025 Clearinghouse
78	MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by City of Los Angeles. Motion Hearing set for 6/19/2025 10:00 AM before Judge Charles R. Breyer. Responses due by 6/30/2025. Replies due by 7/7/2025. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Amicus Brief ISO Preliminary Injunction, # 2 Proposed Order)(Dundas, Michael) (Filed on 6/16/2025) (Entered: 06/17/2025) 1 Proposed Amicus Brief ISO Preliminary Injunction View on RECAP 2 Proposed Order View on RECAP	June 16, 2025	June 16, 2025 RECAP
	Notice of Appearance/Substitution/Change/Withdrawal of Attorney	June 16, 2025	June 16, 2025
79	STIPULATION AND ORDER TO INCREASE PAGE LIMITS by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 76 Stipulation. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2025) (Entered: 06/17/2025)	June 17, 2025	June 17, 2025 RECAP
80	Proposed Order re 78 MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction by City of Los Angeles. (Dundas, Michael) (Filed on 6/17/2025) (Entered: 06/17/2025)	June 17, 2025	June 17, 2025 RECAP
81	ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 78 Motion to File Amicus Curiae Brief. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2025) (Entered: 06/17/2025)	June 17, 2025	June 17, 2025 RECAP
82	MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 328, receipt number BCANDC-20797717.) filed by Democracy Defenders Fund. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Certificate of Good Standing)(Brown, Diamond) (Filed on 6/17/2025) (Entered: 06/17/2025) 1 Supplement Certificate of Good Standing View on RECAP	June 17, 2025	June 17, 2025 RECAP
83	ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 82 Motion for Pro Hac Vice, Diamond Brown. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2025) (Entered: 06/17/2025)	June 17, 2025	June 17, 2025 RECAP
92	Receipt of $100.00 on 06/16/2025 with receipt# 27OT5407 from James Stanley FBO Governor Gavin Newsom et al. (rgh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2025) (Entered: 06/23/2025)	June 17, 2025	June 17, 2025
84	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re [77] First MOTION for Preliminary Injunction ) filed byDonald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 1: Declaration of Ernesto Santacruz, Jr., # (2) Exhibit 2: Declaration of General Steven S. Nordhaus, # (3) Exhibit 3: Declaration of Major General Scott M. Sherman)(Edelman, Christopher) (Filed on 6/18/2025) 1 Exhibit 1: Declaration of Ernesto Santacruz, Jr. View on RECAP 2 Exhibit 2: Declaration of General Steven S. Nordhaus View on RECAP 3 Exhibit 3: Declaration of Major General Scott M. Sherman View on RECAP	June 18, 2025	June 18, 2025 RECAP
85	ERRATA re [84] Opposition/Response to Motion, by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit 2 (Corrected Nordhaus Declaration), # (2) Exhibit 3 (Corrected Sherman Declaration)(Hartlieb, Garry) (Filed on 6/19/2025) 1 Exhibit 2 (Corrected Nordhaus Declaration) View on RECAP 2 Exhibit 3 (Corrected Sherman Declaration View on RECAP	June 19, 2025	June 19, 2025 RECAP
86	MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief filed by County of Los Angeles. Responses due by 7/3/2025. Replies due by 7/10/2025. (Attachments: # (1) Proposed Amicus Brief, # (2) Proposed Order)(Carter, Margaret) (Filed on 6/19/2025) 1 Proposed Amicus Brief View on RECAP 2 Proposed Order View on RECAP	June 19, 2025	June 19, 2025 RECAP
87	REPLY (re [77] First MOTION for Preliminary Injunction ) filed byGavin Newsom, State of California. (Attachments: # (1) Declaration of Megan Richards, # (2) Declaration of Paul S. Eck, # (3) Declaration of Sean Duryee, # (4) Declaration of Daniel Randolph, # (5) Declaration of Dylan Verner-Crist)(Strong, Meghan) (Filed on 6/19/2025) 1 Declaration of Megan Richards View on RECAP 2 Declaration of Paul S. Eck View on RECAP 3 Declaration of Sean Duryee View on RECAP 4 Declaration of Daniel Randolph View on RECAP 5 Declaration of Dylan Verner-Crist View on RECAP	June 19, 2025	June 19, 2025 RECAP
88	TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on 06/20/2025 before Judge Charles R. Breyer by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense, for Court Reporter Ana Dub. (Edelman, Christopher) (Filed on 6/20/2025) (Entered: 06/20/2025)	June 20, 2025	June 20, 2025 RECAP
89	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Charles R. Breyer: Show Cause Hearing held on 6/20/2025. Counsel shall submit supplemental briefing by June 23, 2025 at Noon (12:00 p.m. PST). (Total Time in Court: 11 Minutes) Court Reporter: Ana Dub. Plaintiff Attorney: Jane Reilley, Nicholas Espiritu, Megan Richards, John Echeverria, Michael Mongan, Samuel Harbourt. Defendant Attorney: Eric Hamilton, Garry Hartlieb. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (ls, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 6/20/2025) (Entered: 06/20/2025)	June 20, 2025	June 20, 2025
90	TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on 06/20/2025 before Judge Charles R. Breyer by Gavin Newsom, State of California, for Court Reporter Ana Dub. (Malouff, Marissa) (Filed on 6/20/2025) (Entered: 06/20/2025)	June 20, 2025	June 20, 2025 RECAP
91	Transcript of Proceedings held on June 20, 2025, before Judge Charles R. Breyer. Stenographic Court Reporter Ana Dub, RDR, CRR, telephone number 415-290-1651/ana_dub@cand.uscourts.gov. Per General Order No. 59 and Judicial Conference policy, this transcript may be viewed only at the Clerk's Office public terminal or may be purchased through the Court Reporter until the deadline for the Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date, it may be obtained through PACER. Any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction, if required, is due no later than 5 business days from date of this filing. (Re 90 Transcript Order, 88 Transcript Order ) Release of Transcript Restriction set for 9/18/2025. (Related documents(s) 90, 88 ) (amd, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/20/2025) (Entered: 06/20/2025)	June 20, 2025	June 20, 2025
	Show Cause Hearing	June 20, 2025	June 20, 2025
93	DECLARATION of Andrew Watters in Opposition to 89 Show Cause Hearing,, filed byBlue Eagle Coalition. (Related document(s) 89 ) (Watters, Andrew) (Filed on 6/23/2025) (Entered: 06/23/2025)	June 23, 2025	June 23, 2025 RECAP
94	Supplemental Brief Plaintiffs' Supplemental Brief Re: Jurisdiction and Request for Expedited Discovery in Support of Preliminary Injunction filed byGavin Newsom, State of California. (Strong, Meghan) (Filed on 6/23/2025) (Entered: 06/23/2025)	June 23, 2025	June 23, 2025 RECAP
95	Supplemental Brief re 89 Show Cause Hearing,, filed byDonald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. (Related document(s) 89 ) (Hartlieb, Garry) (Filed on 6/23/2025) (Entered: 06/23/2025)	June 23, 2025	June 23, 2025 RECAP
96	TRANSCRIPT ORDER for proceedings held on June 20, 2025 before Judge Charles R. Breyer for Court Reporter Ana Dub (amd, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/23/2025) (Entered: 06/23/2025)	June 23, 2025	June 23, 2025 RECAP
97	NOTICE by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense re 94 Supplemental Brief (Notice of Objection) (Hartlieb, Garry) (Filed on 6/23/2025) (Entered: 06/23/2025)	June 23, 2025	June 23, 2025 RECAP
103	MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief filed by Martin Akerman. Responses due by 7/7/2025. Replies due by 7/14/2025. (Attachments: # 1 Envelope)(slh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/23/2025) (Entered: 06/27/2025)	June 23, 2025	June 23, 2025 RECAP
	Receipt	June 23, 2025	June 23, 2025
98	ORDER DIRECTING FILING. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 6/24/2025. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2025) (Entered: 06/24/2025)	June 24, 2025	June 24, 2025 RECAP
99	RESPONSE re 98 Order, 94 Supplemental Brief by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. (Hartlieb, Garry) (Filed on 6/25/2025) (Entered: 06/25/2025)	June 25, 2025	June 25, 2025 RECAP
100	ORDER REGARDING NON-PARTY FILINGS. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on June 25, 2025. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/25/2025) (Entered: 06/25/2025)	June 25, 2025	June 25, 2025 RECAP
101	ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY AS TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 6/25/2025. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/25/2025) (Entered: 06/25/2025)	June 25, 2025	June 25, 2025 RECAP
102	ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION BY LOS ANGELES COUNTY FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 86 Motion to File Amicus Curiae Brief. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2025) (Entered: 06/26/2025)	June 26, 2025	June 26, 2025 RECAP
	Documents received 6/16/2025 from non-party Adrian Damico Moon returned pursuant to 100 Order (slh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2025)	June 26, 2025	June 26, 2025
	Documents received 6/16/2025 from non-party Adrian Damico Moon returned pursuant to 100 Order (slh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2025)	June 26, 2025	June 26, 2025
	Documents received 6/16/2025 from non-party Adrian Damico Moon returned pursuant to 100 Order (slh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2025)	June 26, 2025	June 26, 2025
	Remark	June 26, 2025	June 26, 2025
	Documents received 6/17/2025 from non-party Cornelius Lopes returned pursuant to 100 Order (slh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2025)	June 26, 2025	June 26, 2025
104	STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Enlarge Time to Respond to Expedited Discovery and Set Briefing on Discovery Disputes filed by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Edelman, Christopher) (Filed on 7/3/2025) (Entered: 07/03/2025)	July 3, 2025	July 3, 2025 RECAP
105	ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 104 Stipulation. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/4/2025) (Entered: 07/04/2025)	July 4, 2025	July 4, 2025 RECAP
106	MOTION for Protective Order filed by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. Responses due by 7/9/2025. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Kurland, Benjamin) (Filed on 7/9/2025) (Entered: 07/09/2025) 1 Proposed Order View on RECAP	July 9, 2025	July 9, 2025 RECAP
107	Brief Regarding Depositions filed byGavin Newsom, State of California. (Strong, Meghan) (Filed on 7/9/2025) (Entered: 07/09/2025)	July 9, 2025	July 9, 2025 RECAP
108	Order by Judge Charles R. Breyer denying 106 Motion for Protective Order.(crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/9/2025)	July 9, 2025	July 9, 2025 RECAP
109	SCHEDULING ORDER re 77 First MOTION for Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on July 9, 2025. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/9/2025) (Entered: 07/09/2025)	July 9, 2025	July 9, 2025 RECAP
110	Order by Judge Charles R. Breyer denying 103 Motion to File Amicus Curiae Brief.(crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/9/2025) (Entered: 07/09/2025)	July 9, 2025	July 9, 2025 RECAP
	Set/Reset Hearing re 109 Order: Bench Trial set for 8/11/2025 at 10:00 AM before Judge Charles R. Breyer. Bench Trial set for 8/12/2025 at 10:00 AM before Judge Charles R. Breyer. Bench Trial set for 8/13/2025 at 10:00 AM before Judge Charles R. Breyer. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/10/2025)	July 10, 2025	July 10, 2025
	Set/Reset Hearing re 109 Order: Bench Trial set for 8/11/2025 at 10:00 AM before Judge Charles R. Breyer. Bench Trial set for 8/12/2025 at 10:00 AM before Judge Charles R. Breyer. Bench Trial set for 8/13/2025 at 10:00 AM before Judge Charles R. Breyer. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/10/2025)	July 10, 2025	July 10, 2025
111	NOTICE of Appearance filed by Lorraine Lopez on behalf of Gavin Newsom, State of California (Lopez, Lorraine) (Filed on 7/14/2025) (Entered: 07/14/2025)	July 14, 2025	July 14, 2025
112	NOTICE of Appearance filed by Jody D. Lowenstein on behalf of Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense (Lowenstein, Jody) (Filed on 7/14/2025) (Entered: 07/14/2025)	July 14, 2025	July 14, 2025
	Notice of Appearance/Substitution/Change/Withdrawal of Attorney	July 14, 2025	July 14, 2025
113	Joint MOTION for Protective Order filed by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. Responses due by 7/15/2025. Replies due by 7/15/2025. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Ex 1 - Stipulated Protective Order, # 2 Exhibit Ex 2 - Redline to N.D. Cal. Template)(Hartlieb, Garry) (Filed on 7/15/2025) (Entered: 07/15/2025) 1 Proposed Order Ex 1 - Stipulated Protective Order View on PACER 2 Exhibit Ex 2 - Redline to N.D. Cal. Template View on RECAP	July 15, 2025	July 15, 2025 RECAP
114	STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 113 Motion for Protective Order. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/15/2025) (Entered: 07/15/2025)	July 15, 2025	July 15, 2025 RECAP
115	RESPONSE re 109 Order -- Joint Response to Consolidation Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(a)(2) by Gavin Newsom, State of California. (Strong, Meghan) (Filed on 7/18/2025) (Entered: 07/18/2025)	July 18, 2025	July 18, 2025 RECAP
116	ORDER of USCA as to 65 Notice of Appeal to the Ninth Circuit filed by U.S. Department of Defense, Pete Hegseth, Donald J. Trump (slh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/18/2025) (Entered: 07/18/2025)	July 18, 2025	July 18, 2025 RECAP
117	PRETRIAL ORDER. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on July 19, 2025. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/19/2025)	July 19, 2025	July 19, 2025 RECAP
118	ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer. The bench trial scheduled for August 11-13, 2025 will be accessible to members of the public via Zoom pursuant to Civil Local Rule 77-3. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/23/2025) (Entered: 07/23/2025)	July 23, 2025	July 23, 2025
	Order	July 23, 2025	July 23, 2025
119	TRANSCRIPT ORDER for Future Trial with Daily Transcripts by Donald J. Trump, Pete Hegseth, U.S. Department of Defense. (Edelman, Christopher) (Filed on 7/24/2025) (Entered: 07/24/2025)	July 24, 2025	July 24, 2025 RECAP
120	STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Increase Page Limits filed by Gavin Newsom, State of California. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Strong, Meghan) (Filed on 7/25/2025) (Entered: 07/25/2025) 1 Proposed Order View on RECAP	July 25, 2025	July 25, 2025 RECAP
121	STIPULATION AND ORDER TO INCREASE PAGE LIMITS by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 120 Stipulation. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2025) (Entered: 07/25/2025)	July 25, 2025	July 25, 2025 RECAP
122	Clerk's Notice re Trial Deadline for Ordering Daily Transcript and/or Realtime Reporting:The deadline to request daily transcripts or Realtime reporting for counsel during trial is 8/1/2025. More details regarding daily transcripts or Realtime during trial are available on the Transcripts/Court Reporters webpage (see section III) at https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/about/clerks-office/transcripts-court-reporters/Contact the Court Reporter Supervisor with questions at transcripts@cand.uscourts.gov by the deadline above. (mkl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/28/2025) (Entered: 07/28/2025)	July 28, 2025	July 28, 2025
	Clerk's Notice re Trial Deadline for Daily Transcript	July 28, 2025	July 28, 2025
123	ORDER FOR PRETRIAL PREPARATION FOR CIVIL BENCH TRIAL. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 7/29/2025. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/29/2025) (Entered: 07/29/2025)	July 29, 2025	July 29, 2025 RECAP
124	MOTION for Leave to File Amici Curiae Brief filed by Former U.S. Army and Navy Secretaries and Retired Four-Star Admirals and Generals. (Attachments: # 1 Amici Curiae Brief of Former U.S. Army and Navy Secretaries and Retired Four-Star Admirals and Generals, # 2 Proposed Order Granting Motion for Leave to File)(Har, Susan) (Filed on 7/30/2025) (Entered: 07/30/2025) 1 View on RECAP	July 30, 2025	July 30, 2025 RECAP
125	NOTICE of Appearance filed by Jane Petersen Bentrott on behalf of Former U.S. Army and Navy Secretaries and Retired Four-Star Admirals and Generals (Bentrott, Jane) (Filed on 7/30/2025) (Entered: 07/30/2025)	July 30, 2025	July 30, 2025
126	Administrative Motion to File Under Seal in Support of Plaintiff's Supplemental Brief In Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Gavin Newsom, State of California. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Jane Reilley, # 2 Proposed Order, # 3 Unredacted Supplemental Brief, # 4 Unredacted Declaration, # 5 Exhibit 2 Unredacted, # 6 Exhibit 3 Unredacted, # 7 Exhibit 4 Unredacted, # 8 Exhibit 11 Unredacted, # 9 Exhibit 12 Unredacted, # 10 Exhibit 13 Unredacted, # 11 Exhibit 20 Unredacted, # 12 Exhibit 21 Unredacted, # 13 Exhibit 24 Unredacted, # 14 Exhibit 25 Unredacted, # 15 Exhibit 28 Unredacted, # 16 Exhibit 29 Unredacted, # 17 Exhibit 30 Unredacted)(Reilley, Jane) (Filed on 7/30/2025) (Entered: 07/30/2025) 1 Declaration of Jane Reilley View on RECAP 2 Proposed Order View on RECAP	July 30, 2025	July 30, 2025 RECAP
127	Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed byGavin Newsom, State of California. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Jane Reilley -Redacted, # 2 Exhibit 1-30, # 3 Declaration of M. Solorzano, # 4 Exhibit A-B, # 5 Declaration of J. Flores-Haro, # 6 Exhibit A-P)(Reilley, Jane) (Filed on 7/30/2025) (Entered: 07/30/2025) 1 Declaration of Jane Reilley -Redacted View on RECAP 2 Exhibit 1-30 View on RECAP 3 Declaration of M. Solorzano View on RECAP 4 Exhibit A-B View on RECAP 5 Declaration of J. Flores-Haro View on RECAP 6 Exhibit A-P View on RECAP	July 30, 2025	July 30, 2025 RECAP
	Notice of Appearance/Substitution/Change/Withdrawal of Attorney	July 30, 2025	July 30, 2025
128	ORDER MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICI CURIAE BRIEF OF FORMER U.S. ARMY AND NAVY SECRETARIES AND RETIRED FOUR-STAR ADMIRALS AND GENERALS by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 124 Motion for Leave to File. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/31/2025) (Entered: 07/31/2025)	July 31, 2025	July 31, 2025 RECAP
129	NOTICE of Appearance filed by Barbara Horne-Petersdorf on behalf of Gavin Newsom, State of California (Horne-Petersdorf, Barbara) (Filed on 8/1/2025) (Entered: 08/01/2025)	Aug. 1, 2025	Aug. 1, 2025