Ashker v. Alameida et al

Filing 598

ORDER RE: 593 NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 8/26/2022. (bns, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/26/2022)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 TODD ASHKER, Plaintiff, United States District Court Northern District of California 9 10 11 12 v. Case No. 05-cv-03759 CW ORDER RE: NOTICE OF NONCOMPLIANCE (Re: Dkt. No. 593) MICHAEL C. SAYRE, et al., Defendants. 13 14 On February 4, 2010, this Court entered an Order for Specific Performance of the 2002 15 Settlement Agreement between the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 16 (CDCR) and Plaintiff. Docket No. 434. The order provided, among other things, that “Plaintiff 17 shall . . . be allowed to exercise with the theraband and theraball in his cell, and this equipment shall 18 be replaced as necessary.” Id. at 12. 19 On July 29, 2022, Plaintiff filed a “notice of non-compliance,” stating that he has been 20 without his theraball since arriving at Corcoran State Prison on May 23, 2022, and that Defendants 21 have failed to replace the same. Docket No. 593. 22 On August 12, 2022, Defendants filed a response to Plaintiff’s notice of non-compliance, 23 which Defendants served on Plaintiff, stating that “Plaintiff’s Theraball was returned to him on 24 August 11, 2022.” See Docket No. 597 at 1. Defendants contend that, because the theraball has 25 been returned to Plaintiff, and because Plaintiff does not request any other relief in his notice of 26 non-compliance, Defendants’ failure to comply with the Court’s Order for Specific Performance of 27 February 4, 2010, has been corrected and the issue is now moot. See id. at 1-3. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3, the deadline to file a reply in support of the notice of noncompliance was August 19, 2022. As of the date of this order, Plaintiff has not filed a reply. Because the incident of non-compliance discussed in Plaintiff’s notice appears to be moot, the Court shall take no action on Plaintiff’s filing. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 26, 2022 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge 7 8 United States District Court Northern District of California 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?