Arcure, et al. v. Meeker, et al.
Filing
254
CORRECTED ORDER Regarding Witness Subpoenas; CORRECTED ORDER to Supoenaed Witnesses; ORDER VACATING ECF No. 252 , signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 9/19/16. (Marrujo, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
YVONNE ARCURE, et al.,
12
Plaintiffs,
13
14
15
CASE NO. 1:13-cv-00541-MJS (PC)
CORRECTED ORDER REGARDING
WITNESS SUBPOENAS
v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES, et al.,
CORRECTED ORDER TO SUPOENAED
WITNESSES
ORDER VACATING ECF No. 252
16
Defendants.
17
18
19
On September 15, 2016, the court issued an Order Regarding Witness
20
Subpoenas and Order to Subpoenaed Witnesses. (ECF No. 252.) That order contained
21
a typographical error. Accordingly, the Court HEREBY VACATES its September 15,
22
2016 order and issues this corrected order.
23
The matter came before the Court on September 14, 2016, for a pretrial
24
conference and hearing on a motion. Inasmuch as the conference and hearing identified
25
issues in need of resolution prior to trial, the trial date was continued from October 4,
26
2016 to January 26, 2017 at 8:30 a.m.
27
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that all trial subpoenas previously issued
28
and properly served in this case shall remain in full force and effect, but the witness
1
report date shall be, and hereby is, continued from October 4, 2016, to January 26, 2017
2
at 8:30 a.m. Any person or entity already served with a subpoena to appear as a trial
3
witness on October 4, 2016, is hereby ORDERED instead to appear on January 26,
4
2017.
5
6
This Order shall have the same force and effect as the subpoena served on said
witness and will be enforced as such.
7
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
September 19, 2016
/s/
10
Michael J. Seng
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?