Cobb et al v. Brede et al

Filing 120

ORDER RE CHAMBERS COPIES. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 11/7/2011. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/7/2011)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 Northern District of California 3 4 JONATHAN D. COBB, SR., et al., 5 Plaintiffs, No. C 10-03907 MEJ ORDER RE CHAMBERS COPIES v. 6 ERNEST BREDE, et al., 7 8 Defendants. _____________________________________/ 9 10 On November 2, Defendants electronically filed a motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. Nos. 114-15.) However, Defendants failed to comply with General Order 45 and the Court’s Standing 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 Orders by not delivering to the Clerk’s Office “no later than noon on the business day following the 13 day that the papers are filed electronically, one paper copy of each document that is filed 14 electronically . . . marked ‘Chambers Copy’ and . . . clearly marked with the judge’s name, case 15 number, and ‘Chambers Copy-Do Not File.’” See General Order 45 § VI.G; see also Case 16 Management Standing Order, Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James, ¶ 6. The Court ordered 17 Defendants to submit a chambers copy of the above-referenced documents. Dkt. No. 119. 18 The Court is now in receipt of the submitted chambers copies, which do not comply with the 19 previous order. Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS Defendants to re-submit chambers copies 20 of all documents related to their summary judgment motion. Defendants shall ensure that the copies 21 comply with the following requirements: ALL CHAMBERS COPIES OF ELECTRONICALLY 22 FILED DOCUMENTS MUST INCLUDE (1) ON EACH PAGE THE RUNNING HEADER 23 CREATED BY THE ECF SYSTEM, AND (2) ALL EXHIBITS WITH LABELED TAB 24 DIVIDERS. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 27 28 Dated: November 7, 2011 _______________________________ Maria-Elena James Chief United States Magistrate Judge

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?