Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sheikh v. Medical Board of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 3, 2010

FARZANA SHEIKH, M.D. PLAINTIFF,
v.
MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows U.S. Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action seemingly pro se and has paid the filing fee. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302(21), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff's husband, Rehan Sheikh, seeks permission to utilize electronic filing in his representation of her in this case. Rehan Sheikh appears on the masthead of plaintiff's complaint as "engineer," and "state bar associate;" however, no State Bar number is given. Plaintiff is advised that her husband may not represent her unless he is a licensed by the State of California attorney, and is a member of the Bar of this court. See E.D. Local Rule 180. Therefore, the documents signed and filed by Rehan Sheikh may have no legal significance in this case.

Plaintiff is informed that the local rules of this court provide that "[a]ny person appearing pro se may not utilize electronic filing except with the permission of the assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge." E. D. Cal. L. R. 133(b)(2). Requests to use electronic filing may be submitted as written motions setting out an explanation of reasons for the requested exception.

E. D. Cal. L. R. 133(b)(3) ("Requests to use paper or electronic filing as exceptions from these Rules shall be submitted as stipulations as provided in L.R. 143 or, if a stipulation cannot be had, as written motions setting out an explanation of reasons for the exception. Points and authorities are not required, and no argument or hearing will normally be held. . . .")

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. If plaintiff's husband is an attorney licensed by the State of California, he shall submit his bar number via a pleading no later than February 12, 2010, and shall attest to his membership in the Bar of this court. If he is a licensed lawyer, he must sign up for and use CM/ECF (electronic filing).

2. If no pleading is filed by February 12, 2010 as described in paragraph 1, the the complaint is stricken. If plaintiff is representing herself, plaintiff shall file an amended complaint, signed by plaintiff, within 14 days of this order.

3. If no pleading is filed by February 12, 2010 as described in paragraph 1, the request for electronic filing is denied without prejudice, subject to a proper motion signed by plaintiff, demonstrating good cause.

20100203

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.