Ramirez v. 101 Smith Ranch Road Strip Mall et al

Filing 11

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: This is an ADA case that is subject to the case-management deadlines set forth in this districts General Order 56. The plaintiff filed a complaint on June 10, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) The last day to hold a joint site inspection was September 23, 2015, and the deadline to file a notice of need for mediation was 42 days later on November 4, 2015. (ECF No. 3.) No notice was filed. Another issue is that 111 Partners and two individuals (Roger Smith and Michael Smith) answered the complaint and denied that Daniel Ross was an owner or had an ownership interest. (ECF No. 7.) Under the circumstances, the court orders the parties to file a short joint update by November 25, 2015 about 1) whether Daniel Ross should be dismissed or if not, what other action the plaintiff intends to take, and 2) whether the parties request any change in the scheduling order at ECF No. 3. To avoid losing track of the case, the court sets it for a status hearing on December 3, 2015, at 11:00 a.m. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 11/17/2015. (lsS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/17/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 Northern District of California 10 San Francisco Division IRMA RAMIREZ, 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 No. 3:15-cv-02578-LB Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. 13 14 111 Partners, a California General Partnership, et al., 15 Defendants. _____________________________________/ 16 17 This is an ADA case that is subject to the case-management deadlines set forth in this district’s 18 General Order 56. The plaintiff filed a complaint on June 10, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) The last day to 19 hold a joint site inspection was September 23, 2015, and the deadline to file a notice of need for 20 mediation was 42 days later on November 4, 2015. (ECF No. 3.) No notice was filed. Another issue 21 is that 111 Partners and two individuals (Roger Smith and Michael Smith) answered the complaint 22 and denied that Daniel Ross was an owner or had an ownership interest. (ECF No. 7.) Under the 23 circumstances, the court orders the parties to file a short joint update by November 25, 2015 about 24 1) whether Daniel Ross should be dismissed or if not, what other action the plaintiff intends to take, 25 and 2) whether the parties request any change in the scheduling order at ECF No. 3. To avoid losing 26 track of the case, the court sets it for a status hearing on December 3, 2015, at 11:00 a.m. 27 IT IS SO ORDERED. 28 Dated: November 17, 2015 No. 3:15-cv-02578-LB ORDER _______________________________ LAUREL BEELER 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?