Yates v. Mangosteen et al

Filing 30

ORDER SETTING COMPLIANCE HEARING ON SERVICE OF COMPLAINT ON DEFENDANT Compliance Hearing set for 6/8/2012 09:01 AM before Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 4/19/12. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/19/2012)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 3 4 CRAIG YATES, 5 Plaintiff, 6 Case No.: C-10-03747-YGR ORDER SETTING COMPLIANCE HEARING ON SERVICE OF COMPLAINT ON DEFENDANT vs. 7 MANGOSTEEN et al., 8 Defendants. 9 10 11 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: The Court continued the April 23, 2012 Case Management Conference until July 23, 2012 to Northern District of California United States District Court 12 allow Plaintiff to amend the complaint naming the new landlord/ owner of the real property that is the 13 subject of this litigation, to allow time for the new Defendant to answer, and to allow Plaintiff to 14 conduct an inspection with the new landlord and old tenant. Accordingly, the Court hereby sets a 15 Compliance Hearing regarding service of the complaint on the new defendant. 16 A Compliance Hearing shall be held on Friday, June 8, 2012 on the Court’s 9:01 a.m. 17 Calendar, in the Federal Courthouse, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California, in a courtroom to be 18 designated. No later than June 4, 2012, Plaintiff shall file either: (1) proof of service of the summons 19 and the complaint on all defendants; or (2) a motion for additional time to serve defendants based 20 upon good cause for failure to serve within the allowed time period. If compliance is complete, the 21 parties need not appear and the Compliance Conference will be taken off calendar. 22 23 Telephonic appearance will be allowed. IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 26 27 28 April 19, 2012 ________________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 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?