Braun v. Primary Distributor Doe Number 1 et al

Filing 16

ORDER by Judge Maria-Elena James granting in part and denying in part 15 Motion for Leave to File. Given Plaintiffs reliance on the Courts previous orders in this case, Plaintiff may use the previously subpoenaed information in order to attempt resolution through investigation and possible settlement prior to re-filing complaints against the severed Doe Defendants. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/16/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 Northern District of California 6 7 AXEL BRAUN, 8 Plaintiff, 9 No. C 12-5786 MEJ and previously related cases: 12-5812 MEJ 12-5813 MEJ 12-5814 MEJ v. 10 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 PRIMARY DISTRIBUTOR DOE NUMBER 1 and DEFENDANT DOES 2 through 38, ORDER RE: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION Defendants. _____________________________________/ 13 14 On March 11, 2013, the Court severed all Does except Doe 1 from these four cases and 15 removed the related case designation for them. Dkt. No. 14. Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s 16 Application for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration or in the Alternative Request for Further 17 Clarification. Dkt. No. 15. Upon review of Plaintiff’s Application, the Court DENIES his request to 18 file a motion for reconsideration. However, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s request for clarification 19 as follows: Given Plaintiff’s reliance on the Court’s previous orders in this case, Plaintiff may use 20 the previously subpoenaed information in order to attempt resolution through investigation and 21 possible settlement prior to re-filing complaints against the severed Doe Defendants. 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: April 16, 2013 _______________________________ Maria-Elena James 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?