Z.F., et al v. Ripon Unified School District, et al

Filing 167

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 6/29/12: Cross-complainants failed to respond to the September 29, 2011 Order. Therefore, cross-defendant Autism Reform California is dismissed from this action without prejudice. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8
9
10
11

Z.F, a minor, by and through his
parents M.A.F and J.F. and
M.A.F. and J.F. individually;
L.H., and J.H., minors, by and
through their parents J.A. and
J.R.H. and J.A. and J.R.H.
individually; A.N., a minor, by
and through his parents, G.N.
and M.R., and G.N. and M.R.
individually,

12

Plaintiffs, on behalf
of themselves and all
others similarly
situated,

13
14
15

v.

27

RIPON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
(RUSD); RIPON UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES; SAN
JOAQUIN COUNTY OFFICE OF
EDUCATION; VALLEY MOUNTAIN
REGIONAL CENTER (VMRC), MODESTO
CITY SCHOOLS, MODESTO CITY
SCHOOLS BOARD OF EDUCATION,
RICHARD JACOBS, Executive
Director of VMRC, in his
official and individual
capacity, TARA SISEMORE-HESTER,
Coordinator for Autism Services
for VMRC, in her official and
individual capacity; VIRGINIA
JOHNSON, Director of Modesto
City Schools SELPA, in her
official and individual
capacity; SUE SWARTZLANDER,
Program Director for Modesto
City Schools, in her official
and individual capacity and Does
1 – 200.,

28

Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1

2:10-cv-00523-GEB-JFM
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

1

________________________________

2

VALLEY MOUNTAIN REGIONAL
CENTER, RICHARD JACOBS and TARA
SISEMORE-HESTER

3
4
5
6
7

Counter-claimants,
v.
M.A.F. and J.A., SPECIAL NEEDS
ADVOCATES FOR UNDERSTANDING,
and AUTISM REFORM CALIFORNIA,

8
9

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Counter-defendants.
________________________________

10
11

Counter-claimants were required to respond to an Order filed

12

September 29, 2011 by filing a document showing good cause for their

13

failure to serve cross-defendant Autism Reform California within the

14

120-day period prescribed in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). (ECF

15

No. 143, 2:15-25.) This filing was due no later than 4:00 p.m. on

16

October 7, 2011.

17

claimants that failure to make the required showing by the deadline may

18

result in this cross-defendant being dismissed from this action.

Id.

The September 29, 2011 Order warned cross-

19

Cross-complainants failed to respond to the September 29, 2011

20

Order. Therefore, cross-defendant Autism Reform California is dismissed

21

from this action without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23

Dated:

June 29, 2012

24
25
26

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
United States District Judge

27
28
2