Polimaster LTD et al v. RAE Systems. Inc.

Filing 99

ORDER RE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT AND CORRECTION OF PARTY MISIDENTIFICATIONS. Signed by Judge Jeremy Fogel on 9/9/08. (jflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/9/2008)

1 ** E-filed 9/9/08** 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

POLIMASTER LTD and NA&SE TRADING CO. LTD., Plaintiffs, v.

Case Number C 05-1887-JF HRL ORDER1 RE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT AND CORRECTION OF PARTY MISIDENTIFICATIONS [re: docket nos. 49, 74]

RAE SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant.

Defendant RAE Systems, Inc., has brought to the Court's attention an omission and an error in its Order Granting Defendant's Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award filed on February 25, 2008 ("the Order"). First, the Court did not enter judgment when it issued the Order. The omission was inadvertent; Defendant did request entry of judgment in addition to confirmation of the arbitration award. Second, the Order confuses two of the parties: Polimaster Ltd. is misidentified as a Delaware corporation, and RAE Systems, Inc. is misidentified as a corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of Belarus, when in fact the opposite is the case. Both

This disposition is not designated for publication in the official reports.

C a s e No. C 05-1887-JF (HRL) O R D E R RE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT AND CORRECTION OF PARTY MISIDENTIFICATIONS (J FE X 1 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

the omission and the misidentification of the parties were non-substantive clerical errors.2 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a), this Court "may correct a clerical mistake . . . whenever one is found in a judgment, order, or other part of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a). The Court may make such a correction on motion, or on its own, with or without notice. Id. However, "after an appeal has been docketed in the appellate court and while it is pending, such a mistake may be corrected only with the appellate court's leave." Id. Accordingly, this Court directs the Clerk of the Court to transmit the instant order to the Court of Appeals so that the Court of Appeals may consider whether to grant leave to correct the clerical errors. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 09/09/08 __________________________________ JEREMY FOGEL United States District Judge

In a letter to the Court dated September 3, 2008, Plaintiffs argue that Defendant inappropriately requests reconsideration of the Ninth Circuit's order denying Defendant's motion for a limited remand. However the Ninth Circuit's order apparently is based on that court's conclusion that the non-substantive nature of this Court's order is not evident on the face of the record. The purpose of the current order is to provide the Ninth Circuit with additional information as to this Court's intentions. 2
C a s e No. C 05-1887-JF (HRL) O R D E R RE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT AND CORRECTION OF PARTY MISIDENTIFICATIONS (J FE X 1 )

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

This Order has been served upon the following persons: Gary Livaich Kevin Richard Garden John Paul Flynn Ashley Marie Bauer Randall Thomas Kim Tracey Lynn Orick [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

3
C a s e No. C 05-1887-JF (HRL) O R D E R RE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT AND CORRECTION OF PARTY MISIDENTIFICATIONS (J FE X 1 )