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.

Joe Hand Promotions, Inc v. Rex Doblados and Charlie Rochelle Green A/K/A Charlie Rochelle Gaines

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


November 8, 2011

JOE HAND PROMOTIONS, INC., PLAINTIFF,
v.
REX DOBLADOS AND CHARLIE ROCHELLE GREEN A/K/A CHARLIE ROCHELLE GAINES, AND D/B/A ENVY ULTRA LOUNGE A/K/A VYBE, DEFENDANTS.

ORDER SETTING STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE INDIVIDUALLY

Defendant Charlie Gaines is proceeding pro se. The action has therefore been referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21) for all purposes encompassed by that rule.

On September 15, 2011, defendant Charlie Rochelle Gaines filed an answer purporting to be filed on behalf of defendant Rex Doblados and himself. However, only defendant Gaines' name, address and telephone number appears on the upper left hand corner of the document. Moreover, only defendant Gaines' name appears on the signature line of the answer. Finally, defendant Gaines did not sign the answer filed with the court. (Doc. No. 5 at 8.)

The right to represent oneself pro se is personal to the litigant and does not extend to other parties. Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc., 546 F.3d 661, 664 (9th Cir. 2008). "A litigant appearing in propria persona has no authority to represent anyone other than himself." Russell v. United States, 308 F.2d 78, 79 (9th Cir. 1962). Moreover, all pleadings shall be signed by the party involved and the name, address and telephone number of each party appearing in propria persona shall appear in the upper left-hand corner of the first page of each document presented for filing on the party's behalf. Local Rule 131(a)-(b). In this regard, if defendants wish to file a joint answer, they must file an answer in which the name, address and telephone number of each defendant is listed on the upper left hand corner of the first page and each defendant must sign the answer.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, and pursuant to the provisions of Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Defendants shall file an amended answer that cures the defects noted above within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this order.

2. A Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference is set for Friday, January 13, 2012, at 10:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California, in Courtroom No. 27, before the undersigned.

3. Each party is required to appear at the Status Conference, either by counsel or, if proceeding in propria persona, on his own behalf. Any party may appear at the status conference telephonically if the party pre-arranges such appearance by contacting Pete Buzo, the courtroom deputy of the undersigned magistrate judge, at (916) 930-4128, no later than 48 hours before the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference; a land line telephone number must be provided.

3. Plaintiff shall file and serve his own separate status report on or before December 30, 2011, and each pro se defendant shall file and serve his own separate status report on or before January 6, 2012. Each party's status report shall address all of the following matters:

a. Progress of service of process;

b. Possible joinder of additional parties;

c. Possible amendment of the pleadings;

d. Jurisdiction and venue;

e. Anticipated motions and the scheduling thereof;

f. Anticipated discovery and the scheduling thereof, including disclosure of expert witnesses;

g. Future proceedings, including the setting of appropriate cut-off dates for discovery and for law and motion, and the scheduling of a final pretrial conference and trial;

h. Modification of standard pretrial procedures specified by the rules due to the relative simplicity or complexity of the action;

i. Whether the case is related to any other case, including matters in bankruptcy;

j. Whether the parties will stipulate to the magistrate judge assigned to this matter acting as settlement judge, waiving any disqualification by virtue of his so acting, or whether they prefer to have a Settlement Conference before another magistrate judge;

k. Whether the parties intend to consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge; and

l. Any other matters that may aid in the just and expeditious disposition of this action.

4. The parties are cautioned that failure to file a status report or failure to appear at the status conference may result in an order imposing an appropriate sanction. See Local Rules 110 and 183.

DAD:6 Ddad1\orders.pro se\hand-doblados1754.ossc

20111108

© 1992-2011 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.