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.

Scott N. Johnson v. Shadi Ram

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


November 14, 2011

SCOTT N. JOHNSON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SHADI RAM, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A ONE STOP MART; AVTAR CHAMBER, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A ONE STOP MART; RAM MARKETS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS.

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

ORDER

On October 21, 2011, the undersigned entered an Order and Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order ("Scheduling Order") in this case (Dkt. No. 16).*fn1 The Scheduling Order did not set a date for either the final pretrial scheduling conference or the trial in this case because the court lacked information required to properly set those dates. Accordingly, the Scheduling Order required that on or before November 10, 2011: (1) "defendant Shadi Ram shall file an amended answer with the court"; (2) "defendant Avtar Chamber shall file an answer with the court"; (3) "all parties shall file a notice with the court, preferably on the form that accompanied the Order Setting Status Conference in this case (see Dkt. No. 4, Doc. No. 4-2), whether they consent to or decline the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge." (Scheduling Order at 10.)

A review of the court's docket reveals that some of the parties have not complied with the court's Scheduling Order. First, defendant Shadi Ram did not file an amended answer to the complaint on or before November 10, 2011. Second, defendant Avtar Chamber did not file an answer to the complaint on or before November 10, 2011. Third, although plaintiff and Mr. Chamber filed notices consenting to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge (Dkt. Nos. 17, 19), Mr. Ram has not filed a notice indicating whether he consents to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge.*fn2 By this order, the undersigned provides Mr. Ram and Mr. Chamber with additional time to comply with the Scheduling Order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. On or before December 2, 2011, defendant Shadi Ram shall file an amended answer to plaintiff's complaint.

2. On or before December 2, 2011, defendant Avtar Chamber shall file an answer to plaintiff's complaint.

3. On or before December 2, 2011, defendant Shadi Ram shall file a notice with the court, preferably on the form that accompanied the Order Setting Status Conference in this case (see Dkt. No. 4, Doc. No. 4-2), whether he consents to or declines the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.