Antioco v. United States Of America

Filing 33

ORDER by Judge Susan Illston granting 32 Motion to remove reply. (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/8/2014)

Download PDF
1 MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612) United States Attorney 2 THOMAS MOORE (ALBN 4305-078T) 3 Chief, Tax Division 4 CYNTHIA STIER (DCBN 423256) Assistant United States Attorney 5 11th Floor Federal Building San Francisco, California 94102 6 Telephone: (415) 436-7000 FAX: (415) 436-7009 7 8 Attorneys for United States of America 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 13 JURATE ANTIOCO, 14 Plaintiff, 15 v. 16 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 17 Defendant. 18 19 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C-13-0924-SI APPLICATION BY UNITED STATES TO REMOVE REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ANSWER TO FILE COUNTERCLAIM (DOCKET #31) AND [PROPOSED] ORDER The United States respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order requiring the Clerk of the 20 Court to remove the Reply to Opposition to Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to File Counterclaim 21 (Docket Entry #31) for the reason that it contains information that was not redacted prior to filing the 22 Reply. 23 Respectfully submitted, 24 MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney 25 /s/ Cynthia Stier CYNTHIA STIER Assistant United States Attorney Tax Division 26 27 28 APPLICATATION TO REMOVE REPLY NO. C-13-0924 SI 1 ORDER 1 2 Based upon the Application by United States To Remove Reply to Opposition to Motion for Leave 3 to Amend Answer to File Counterclaim (Docket Entry #31), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk 4 of Court remove the Reply to Opposition to Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to File Counterclaim 5 (Docket Entry #31). 6 7 8 SO ORDERED DATED: 4/8/14 _______________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 APPLICATATION TO REMOVE REPLY NO. C-13-0924 SI 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?