United States Of America v. Asberry
Filing
23
AMENDED ORDER REFERRING DEFENDANT TO FEDERAL PRO BONO PROJECT FOR PURPOSES OF REPRESENTATION FOR MEDIATION. Signed by Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on November 20, 2012. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/21/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
Northern District of California
United States District Court
11
12
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
13
14
v.
15
16
Case No.: 11-cv-6531 JSC
AMENDED ORDER REFERRING
DEFENDANT TO FEDERAL PRO
BONO PROJECT FOR PURPOSES OF
REPRESENTATION FOR
MEDIATION
JOSEPH N. ASBERRY, a.k.a. JOSEPH
ASBERRY, a.k.a. J.N. ASBERRY,
17
Defendant.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
This Order amends the Court’s November 19, 2012 Order. Docket No. 22 is
VACATED.
Upon review of the file in this matter, the Court concludes that it is appropriate to refer
the Defendant to the Federal Pro Bono Project to attempt to secure pro bono counsel to
represent Defendant for purposes of mediation. Accordingly:
1.
The clerk shall forward to the Volunteer Legal Services Program of the Bar
Association of San Francisco (“BASF”), one copy of the court file with a notice
of referral of the case pursuant to the guidelines of the Federal Pro Bono Project
for referral to a volunteer attorney.
1
2.
Upon being notified by BASF that an attorney has been located to represent
2
Defendant, that attorney shall be appointed counsel for Defendant in this matter
3
to represent Defendant for purposes of mediation.
4
5
3.
Following the appointment of counsel, the Court will refer the matter to the
Court’s ADR unit for mediation.
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
8
9
Dated: November 20, 2012
_________________________________
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
10
Northern District of California
United States District Court
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?