Flores et al v. Velocity Express, Inc.
Filing
173
ORDER VACATING HEARING re 162 MOTION to Amend/Correct 156 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment To Certify The Same For Interlocutory Appeal Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. Section 1292(b) filed by TransForce, Inc., Dynamex Operations East, LLC, Velocity Express, LLC. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on June 18, 2015. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2015)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
PHILLIP FLORES, et al.,
Case No. 12-cv-05790-JST
Plaintiffs,
5
ORDER VACATING HEARING
v.
6
7
VELOCITY EXPRESS, LLC, et al.,
Re: ECF No. 162
Defendants.
8
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Amend April 16, 2015 Partial Summary
10
Judgment Order to Certify the Same for Interlocutory Appeal. ECF No. 162. Pursuant to Federal
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
9
Rule of Civil Procedure 78(b) and Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court finds the matter suitable for
12
disposition without oral argument. The hearing on this matter, currently scheduled for June 25,
13
2015, is hereby VACATED.
14
If, however, any party advises the Court in writing by no later than two days from the date
15
of this Order that most or all of the argument for its side will be conducted by a lawyer who has
16
been licensed to practice law for four or fewer years, and who has not previously presented
17
argument before this Court, then the Court will reschedule the hearing at a time that is convenient
18
to all parties in order to provide that opportunity. Counsel shall confer with each other, and the
19
party requesting the rescheduling of the hearing shall identify the upcoming available dates on the
20
Court’s calendar at which all counsel are available for the hearing.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 17, 2015
_____________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
United States District 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?