Li v. Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated
Filing
43
ORDER. (vrwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/13/2010).
Li v. Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated
Doc. 43
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 XIN XIN ("Annie") LI, Plaintiff, v MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, DOES ONE TO TEN, Defendants. / No C 09-3622 VRW ORDER MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, Plaintiff, v XIN XIN ("Annie") LI, Defendant. No C 10-2009 VRW ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dockets.Justia.com
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
On August 24, 2010 the court ordered Xin Xin "Annie" Li to show cause why judgment should not be entered against her in the above-captioned cases. Doc #15. In its order, the court made
clear that failure to respond would be considered grounds on which to enter judgment in favor of Merrill Lynch in the both cases. Id.
Li has not filed a response to the court's order and the deadline for doing so has passed. Accordingly, the clerk is DIRECTED to
enter judgment in cases 09-cv-3622 VRW and 10-cv-2009 in favor of MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED, to terminate all motions, to vacate all hearings and to close the files.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
VAUGHN R WALKER United States District Chief Judge
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?