Prystawik et al v. Hewlett-Packard Company
ORDER RE 24 PLAINTIFFS' OBJECTION DATED DECEMBER 18, 2013. Signed by Judge Alsup on 1/3/2014. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/3/2014) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/3/2014: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (dt, COURT STAFF).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
STEFAN M. PRYSTAWIK and
No. C 13-02831 WHA
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’
DECEMBER 18, 2013
Pro se plaintiffs Stefan M. Prystawik and Arnim Voelkner have filed an objection dated
December 18, 2013 (Dkt. No. 24). The objection is directed at the report and recommendation
filed on November 19, 2013, to dismiss this matter because of plaintiffs’ failure to timely serve
defendant. The fourteen-day period for objecting to this report and recommendation, however,
has come and gone. In fact, an order dated December 6, 2013 adopted the report and
recommendation, with judgment entered that same day. Although plaintiffs’ objection states that
“at no time so far in these proceedings have Plaintiffs received ANY copies of filed documents,”
the report and recommendation was sent to defendants’ address — 332 S Michigan Ave., Suite
1032, Chicago, IL 60604 — the same address listed on plaintiffs’ objection (see Dkt. Nos. 18,
24). Accordingly, the objection is untimely and does not affect the December 6 order and
judgment entered here.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 3, 2014.
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?