Singleton v. Hedgepath et al

Filing 216

ORDER Vacating Order of August 8, 2014, to the Extent that it Orders the "Notice Regarding Settlement" Stricken from the Record; ORDER Reinstating Defendants' "Notice Regarding Settlement" filed on August 7, 2014, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 08/11/2014. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KELVIN X. SINGLETON,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.
S. LOPEZ, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

1:08-cv-00095-AWI-GSA-PC
ORDER VACATING ORDER OF
AUGUST 8, 2014, TO THE EXTENT
THAT IT ORDERS THE “NOTICE
REGARDING SETTLEMENT”
STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD
(Doc. 215.)
ORDER REINSTATING DEFENDANTS’
“NOTICE REGARDING SETTLEMENT”
FILED ON AUGUST 7, 2014
(Doc. 214.)

18
19

I.

INTRODUCTION

20

On August 8, 2014, the court issued an order in this action containing two parts: (1)

21

“order denying substitution of attorneys” and (2) “order striking notice regarding settlement.”

22

(Doc. 215.) The “order striking notice regarding settlement” was issued in error and shall be

23

vacated. The “order denying substitution of attorneys” shall remain in force.

24

II.

BACKGROUND

25

Plaintiff is a pro se litigant. On August 7, 2014, Attorney Ashley N. Johndro filed a

26

“notice of appearance” as counsel for Plaintiff. (Doc. 213.) On August 8, 2014, the court

27

issued an order denying the substitution of Attorney Johndro as counsel for Plaintiff. (Doc.

28

215.)
1

1

A “notice regarding settlement” was also filed on August 7, 2014. (Doc. 214.) The

2

court presumed, in error, that the “notice regarding settlement” was also filed by Attorney

3

Johndro on Plaintiff’s behalf, and ordered the notice to be stricken from the record as

4

improperly filed. (Doc. 215.) In fact, the “notice regarding settlement” was properly filed by

5

Defendants and should not have been stricken from the record. Therefore, the court’s order of

6

August 8, 2014, shall be vacated to the extent that it orders the “notice regarding settlement”

7

stricken from the record.

8

III.

9
10

CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

The court’s order of August 8, 2014 is VACATED to the extent that it orders the

11

“notice regarding settlement” filed on August 7, 2014, to be stricken from the

12

record;

13

2.

14
15

denies substitution of Attorney Ashley N. Johndro as counsel for Plaintiff;
3.

16
17

The court’s order of August 8, 2014 REMAINS IN FORCE to the extent that it

The “notice regarding settlement” filed by Defendants on August 7, 2014 is
REINSTATED on the court’s record; and

4.

18

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to reflect on the court’s record that the
“notice regarding settlement” (Doc. 214) filed on August 7, 2014, is not stricken

19

from the record.

20
21
22

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 11, 2014

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2