Brooks v. Gomez et al
Filing
42
ORDER, Set/Reset Deadlines as to 30 MOTION to Amend/Correct 29 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION to Amend/Correct 29 MOTION to Dismiss, 28 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint. Motion Hearing set for 10/18/2011 01:00 PM in Courtroom 1, 4th Floor, Oakland before Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong.. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 7/7/11. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/8/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT
10
OAKLAND DIVISION
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
ELLEN BROOKS,
) U.S. DIST. CT. CASE NO. C10-01873 SBA
)
PLAINTIFF,
) ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON
) DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO
VS.
) DISMISS SECOND AMENDED
) COMPLAINT
RUTHE GOMEZ, AN INDIVIDUAL,
)
ADVISORY FINANCIAL
) (CIVIL LOCAL RULE 6-2)
CONSULTANTS, INC., A CORPORATION, )
KIMBLE MASON, AN INDIVIDUAL,
)
GEORGE DRAGEL, AN INDIVIDUAL,
)
TRADERIGHT SECURITIES, INC., A
)
CORPORATION, LEGENT CLEARING, LLC )
AND DOES 1 THROUGH 20,
)
)
DEFENDANTS.
)
)
)
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
CASE NO. C10-01873 SBA
SFCA_1826859.1
1
TO PLAINTIFF ELLEN BROOKS, DEFENDANTS LEGENT CLEARING,
2
LLC, RUTHE GOMEZ, AND ADVISORY FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC., AND
3
ALL OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES:
4
The Court having considered Plaintiff Ellen Brooks and Defendants Legent
5
Clearing, LLC, Ruthe Gomez and Advisory Financial Consultants, Inc.’s Stipulation to
6
Continue Hearing on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint,
7
pursuant to Civil Local Rules 6-2,
8
9
10
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the hearing date for Defendants’
respective Motions to Dismiss, Docket 28 and Docket 30, shall be continued from
September 27, 2011 to the next available date of October 18, 2011 at 1:00 p.m.
11
12
DATE: _JULY 7, 2011
HON. SAUNDRA B. ARMSTRONG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
[PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
CASE NO. C10-01873 SBA
SFCA_1826859.1
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?