United States of America v. 11880 East Harvard Avenue, Sanger, CA 93657
Filing
73
ORDER to Strike Document 66, to Bar Claimant Carter-Ford's Further Ex Parte Communications, and to Close Action, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/5/12. CASE CLOSED. (Verduzco, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
CASE NO. CV F 09-1004 LJO GSA
12
Plaintiff,
ORDER TO STRIKE DOCUMENT 66, TO
BAR CLAIMANT CARTER-FORD’S
FURTHER EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS,
AND TO CLOSE ACTION
13
vs.
14
15
16
11880 EAST HARVARD AVENUE,
etc.
Defendants.
17
/
18
19
This Court has received and reviewed the parties’ responses to this Court's order on the issues
20
of an assertion of In Pro Per representation, striking doc. no. 66, ex parte filings, and unnoticed motions.
21
This Court finds that claimant Carter-Ford is represented by counsel and may not file her own
22
pleadings that circumvent the in-place legal representation. This Court further finds that the claimant
23
Carter-Ford's submission of such pleadings, especially without notice to other parties to the litigation,
24
and in an ex parte manner violate the Eastern District Local Rules (131) as well the Federal Rules of
25
Civil Procedure, Rule 5.
26
This Court strikes the improperly filed pleading, doc. no. 66, and closes this action. Should the
27
claimant Carter-Ford violate further rules in this case, she will be subject to an Order to Show Cause In
28
Re Contempt, and face severe monetary sanctions.
1
1
2
Finally, doc. no. 66 will no longer be deemed filed, will only be lodged, and the temporary
sealing order is lifted. This Court denies all relief sought by doc. no. 66.
3
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
66h44d
March 5, 2012
/s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?