Wilson v. Bradshaw Consulting Services, Inc. et al

Filing 20

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 4/23/10 ORDERING that pursuant to the parties' 19 Stipulation, the Court's 9/10/09 15 Order on the Motion to Dismiss is AMENDED re claims as to Tony Bradshaw. (Owen, K)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 On November 24, 2009, the parties filed a Stipulation 18 regarding the September 10, 2009, Order ("Order") filed in this case, 19 which granted the Defendants' motions to dismiss. 20 in the Stipulation that the Order "[a]s it is presently worded . . . 21 may imply incorrectly that Plaintiff's second, third and sixth claims 22 were dismissed as to both [Defendants]" when "Defendants requested 23 that the Court dismiss Plaintiff's second, third, and sixth claims 24 against Defendant Tony Bradshaw only." 25 through 20 of the Order are amended as follows in accordance with the 26 parties' stipulation: 27 28 Also on August 4, 2009[,] Bradshaw and Defendant Bradshaw Consulting Services, Inc. filed a motion 1 (Stip. 2:18-22.) Lines 17 The parties state JOSEPH WILSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) BRADSHAW CONSULTING SERVICES, INC.,) a South Carolina Corporation; TONY ) L. BRADSHAW, an individual, ) ) Defendants. ) ) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

2:09-cv-02077-GEB-DAD ORDER AMENDING THE SEPTEMBER 10, 2009 ORDER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

under Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff's second, third and sixth claims for relief against Defendant Tony Bradshaw and Plaintiff's fifth claim for relief against Defendant Tony Bradshaw and Defendant Bradshaw Consulting Services, Inc. for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Stip. 2:27-3:3.) Dated: April 23, 2010

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge

2