Bhatia et al v. Corrigan
ORDER CONCERNING JANE DOES GUARDIAN AD LITEM.. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 2/5/08. (scc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2008)
Bhatia et al v. Corrigan
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On May 16, 2007, the Court ordered Plaintiff Lal Bhatia to submit within two weeks a list of three nominees to serve as guardian ad litem for Jane Doe, his minor daughter. After v. STEPHEN CORRIGAN; DOES 1-100, Defendants. / LAL BHATIA; JANE DOE, a Minor, Plaintiffs, No. C 07-2054 CW ORDER CONCERNING JANE DOE'S GUARDIAN AD LITEM IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
receiving three extensions of time, Plaintiff was given until November 30, 2007 to provide the list of three nominees. On
November 29, 2007, Plaintiff provided the Court with the name of one nominee: Jane Doe's maternal grandfather, Satish Mehta. On December 12, 2007, the Court ordered Plaintiff to submit a sworn declaration from Mr. Mehta stating, among other things, whether he has consulted with Jane Doe concerning her claims in this lawsuit and whether he has consulted on Jane Doe's behalf an attorney, other than Plaintiff's counsel, admitted to practice law
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
in this District. declaration.
Plaintiff did not submit the required
At a case management on January 8, 2008, the Court informed Plaintiff that Mr. Mehta was not a suitable guardian ad litem for Jane Doe. The Court ordered Plaintiff to submit by January 22,
2008 a list of up to three nominees for Jane Doe's guardian ad litem. To date, Plaintiff has not submitted the required list.
Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to identify three nominees to serve as Jane Doe's guardian ad litem by February 11, 2008. this date, Plaintiff must also submit a declaration from each nominee stating whether the nominee has consulted with Jane Doe concerning her claims in this lawsuit, and whether the nominee has consulted on Jane Doe's behalf an attorney, other than Plaintiff's counsel, admitted to practice law in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The declaration By
shall also state where the nominee lives and the level of involvement the nominee intends to have in this lawsuit. In
addition, the nominee shall affirm that he or she does not have a conflict that would prevent him or her from representing the interests of Jane Doe. If Plaintiff does not comply with this order by February 11, 2008, Jane Doe's claims will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. IT IS SO ORDERED.
CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge 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?