Agha-Khan v. Bank of America et al
Filing
46
ORDER Pursuant to Status Conference re Criminal Contempt, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 3/22/2017. Status Conference set for 4/11/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 4 (LJO) before Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill. (Jessen, A)
1
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
6
IN RE THE CONTEMPT OF SALMA AGHAKHAN, Plaintiff
1:17-CV-011-DAD
ORDER PURSUANT TO STATUS
CONFERENCE RE CRIMINAL
CONTEMPT
7
8
On February 9, 2017, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause re Criminal Contempt (“OSC”),
9
10 explaining that the Court “the Court will hold a hearing to determine whether Plaintiff should be held in
11 criminal contempt for the language contained in [her] filings in this case.” Doc. 4 at 1. The Court set a
12 status conference for the matter on March 22, 2017. Doc. 22.
At the status conference, the U.S. Attorney’s Office stated that it is still evaluating whether it
13
14 will proceed with the Court’s request to prosecute Plaintiff for contempt, and requested more time to
15 commit.
16
As explained on the record in open Court during that status conference, Plaintiff emailed the
17 undersigned’s judicial assistant on the morning of March 22, 2017,1 stating: “This request for injunctive
18 relief [attached as a PDF document] was filed with Ninth Circuit on March 06, 2017. A copy was mailed
19 to Judge O’Neill. Thus today's hearing Re: Criminal Contempt should be off the calendar. Also Appeal
20 was sent to Supreme Court for filing.” The undersigned’s judicial assistant responded: “Filing the
21 motion does not stay the proceedings in this court. Please be advised, if you do not appear for your
22 hearing today, Judge O’Neill will be issuing a bench warrant for your arrest.” Plaintiff responded:
23 “Thanks. But he has no jurisdiction as he is not a Judge on my case. So he is acting as an individual and
24
25
1
The email chain between Plaintiff and the undersigned’s judicial assistant are attached to this Order.
1
1
2
3
4
is threatening me. This is what I was told by certain investigating authorities.”
Plaintiff did not appear at the status conference. Accordingly, the Court issued a warrant for her
arrest with bail set at $50,000.
The Court will hold a status conference for April 11, 2017, at 10:00A.M. to discuss the U.S.
5
Attorney’s Office’s prosecutorial position and how the parties intend to proceed. The Plaintiff is
6
encouraged to have counsel at that hearing.
7
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
March 22, 2017
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
Page 1 of 1
Re: FYI
Salma Agha
to:
NHayen
03/22/2017 08:57 AM
Hide Details
From: Salma Agha
To: NHayen@caed.uscourts.gov
History: This message has been forwarded.
Thanks. But he has no jurisdiction as he is not a Judge on my case. So he is acting as an
individual and is threatening me. This is what I was told by certain investigating authorities.
-----Original Message----From: NHayen
To: Salma Agha
Sent: Wed, Mar 22, 2017 7:46 am
Subject: Re: FYI
Dr. Agha-Khan,
Filing the motion does not stay the proceedings in this court. Please be advised, if you do
not appear for your hearing today, Judge O'Neill will be issuing a bench warrant for your
arrest.
Natalie A. Hayen
Judicial Assistant and Staff Attorney to
Chief District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill
Robert E. Coyle United States Courthouse
2500 Tulare Street
Fresno, California 93721
559.499.5793
From:
Salma Agha
To:
nhayen@caed.uscourts.gov
Date:
03/22/2017 06:26 AM
Subject:
FYI
Good Morning,
This request for injunctive relief was filed with Ninth Circuit on March 06, 2017 A copy was
mailed to Judge O'Neill. Thus today's hearing Re: Criminal Contempt should be off the
calendar. Also Appeal was sent to Supreme Court for filing.
Thanking You,
Salma Agha-Khan, MD.[attachment "Appeal_Doc60_Emergency_Motiion_TRO_3_6_2017.pdf"
deleted by Natalie Hayen/CAED/09/USCOURTS]
3/22/2017
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?