Bruzzone et al v. Intel Corporation et al

Filing 35

NOTICE REGARDING DISMISSAL AND ORDER REGARDING SUMMONS. Signed by Judge Alsup on February 28, 2014. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/3/2014)

1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3
4

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
6

MICHAEL A. BRUZZONE,

7
8

Plaintiff,
v.

9

INTEL CORPORATION,

10

Defendant.

12

NOTICE REGARDING DISMISSAL
AND ORDER REGARDING
“SUMMONS”
/

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

No. C 13-03729 WHA

This action was filed in August 2013. On February 26, 2014, Michael A. Bruzzone filed

13

a “proof of service of second amended complaint to relator civil complaint.” According to the

14

record, this was Mr. Bruzzone’s first attempt to serve any complaint. The face of the document

15

does not indicate any summons was served, and indeed, the complaint was only allegedly mailed

16

“by overnight post” to Intel Corporation. This order notes a rectangle on the page (Dkt. No. 29).

17

At 11:00 a.m. on February 27, 2014, plaintiff Michael A. Bruzzone and Attorney Steven

18

Dillick (appearing specially for Mr. Bruzzone’s counsel R. Kenneth Bauer) appeared. Attorney

19

Sara Winslow appeared on behalf of the United States (Dkt. Nos. 8, 9, 18, 20, 22). Mr.

20

Bruzzone’s request to proceed pro se was approved. Oral argument was heard and Mr. Bruzzone

21

was informed of the reasons why his action could not proceed. The action was dismissed. On

22

February 27, an order dismissing the action and judgment were entered (Dkt. Nos. 31, 32).

23

The same day, Mr. Bruzzone was apparently able to obtain a “summons” to Intel

24

Corporation. This order gently reminds Mr. Bruzzone that this action has been dismissed,

25

cannot proceed, and the “summons” is void. Please do not represent to anyone that this action is

26

on-going or the undersigned judge has blessed any pending or future action.

27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 28, 2014.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE