Altman v. HO Sports Company, Inc.

Filing 21

ORDER Correcting Order of August 20, 2009, Nunc Pro Tunc 19 , signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 8/27/09: Plaintiff's motion to remand is correct nunc pro tunc to reflect that the September 8, 2009, hearing date on the motion to remand is vacated.(Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 This order does not affect Defendant's motion to dismiss or the September 8, 2009, hearing date on Defendant's motion to dismiss. 1 ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) ) HO SPORTS COMPANY, INC., dba ) HYPERLITE, BEN SIMS, and DOES 1 ) to 100, ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) JEFFREY ALTMAN, 1:09-cv-1000 AWI SMS ORDER CORRECTING ORDER OF AUGUST 20, 2009, NUNC PRO TUNC (Doc. No. 19) On August 20, 2009, this Court denied Plaintiff's motion to remand and vacated the hearing date on the motion. See Court's Docket Doc. No. 19. The order mistakenly identified September 14, 2009, as the hearing date for the motion to remand. In fact, the hearing date was September 8, 2009, and there is no hearing set in this case for September 14, 2009. The Court will issue this order nunc pro tunc to reflect that the August 20, 2009, remand order vacated the September 8, 2009, hearing date. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's August 20, 2009, order on Plaintiff's motion to remand is corrected nunc pro tunc to reflect that the September 8, 2009, hearing date on the motion to remand is vacated.1 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: ciem0h August 27, 2009 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?