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.

Williams v. Sullivan

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


June 1, 2010

ANTHONY WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SULLIVAN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

By order filed March 17, 2010, the undersigned found that plaintiff's complaint stated a colorable claim for relief against defendant Sullivan. The claims against defendants Dematteo and Bal were dismissed with thirty days to file an amended complaint.

On April 27, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion for clarification. Plaintiff states that he is unsure how to proceed as to the "doe" defendant named in the original complaint. Plaintiff is herein advised that once he discovers the identity of the "doe" defendant, he may file a motion for leave to file an amended complaint identifying this new defendant as well as describing the claims against the "doe" and any other named defendants, and plaintiff should attach his proposed amended complaint to his motion for leave to file the amended complaint.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for clarification (Dkt. No. 12) is resolved.

20100601

© 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.