Haefner v. Berlin

Filing 28

ORDER Re Service of Supplemental Information in Support of Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 06/06/2011. (dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/6/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 SCOTT HAEFNER, 12 13 Plaintiff(s), v. 14 ORDER RE SERVICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT GLORIA RHOADS BERLIN, 15 No. C-11-00112 DMR Defendant(s). ___________________________________/ 16 17 On April 25, 2011, this Court issued an Order Regarding Supplemental Information On 18 Motion for Default Judgment and Continuing Hearing Date. See Docket No. 17. The Court ordered 19 Plaintiff to submit supplemental information in support of the motion, and at the same time Plaintiff 20 submitted the information to the Court, to serve the supplemental information on Defendant Gloria 21 Rhoads Berlin and to e-file a proof of service on the same day that service was effected. 22 The Court notes that Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s order to file a proof of 23 service of the supplemental information (Docket Nos. 21-23) with the Court. Plaintiff is therefore 24 ordered to immediately comply with the Court’s previous order and e-file a proof of service. 25 If Plaintiff has not yet served the supplemental information on Defendant, Plaintiff is ordered 26 to serve Docket Nos. 21-23 on Defendant by Express Mail no later than June 6, 2011 and to e- 27 file a proof of service on the same day that service is effected. 28 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 3 Dated: June 6, 2011 4 DONNA M. RYU United States Magistrate Judge 5 6 7 8 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 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?