IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 14, 2012
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jennifer L. Thurston United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DISREGARDING NOTICE FOR PETITION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (Docs. 15-16).
On November 23, 2011, Plaintiff initiated this civil rights action against various individuals. (Doc. 1). On March 9, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Petition of Settlement and Affidavit in Support of the Petition ("Petition"). (Docs. 15-16). Plaintiff's Petition recites numerous "settlement terms" upon which Plaintiff contends Defendants have agreed to perform and asks this Court to direct Defendants to comply with the stated terms. (Doc. 16 at 3). Given that the Court has not yet had the opportunity to screen the complaint and therefore has not authorized service of a summons upon any defendant, the Court does not have jurisdiction over any defendant at this time. (See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k); see also Getz v. Boeing Co., 654 F.3d 852, 858 (9th Cir. Cal. 2011) (explaining that serving a summons establishes personal jurisdiction over a defendant).
To the extent Plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this case because of some agreement he
has reached, he may request that this Court dismiss the case. However, the Court does not have the ability to order a party, who not under its jurisdiction, to perform any action, including performance of terms of a settlement.
Therefore, the Notice of Settlement and Affidavit in Support of Settlement (Docs. 15-16) are DISREGARDED for lack of jurisdiction.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.