Trachsel et al v Ronald Bushholz, et al
AMENDED ORDER VACATING HEARING DATE. Signed by Judge Whyte on 10/22/08. (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2008)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United 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
AMENDED ORDER VACATING HEARING DATE --No. C-08-02248 RMW JAS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
STEVE TRACHSEL et al., Plaintiffs, v. RONALD BUCHHOLZ et al., Defendants.
No. C-08-02248 RMW AMENDED ORDER VACATING HEARING DATE
Plaintiff's application for right to attach order and order for issuance of writ of attachment presently set for hearing on November 7, 2008 is hereby submitted on the papers without oral argument. See Civil L.R. 7-1(b). The hearing date of November 7, 2008 is vacated. If, upon consideration of the matter, the court deems that oral argument is necessary or would be helpful to the court, the matter will be reset for hearing no earlier than December 5, 2008.
RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge
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
Notice of this document has been electronically sent to: Counsel for Plaintiff: Jesshill E. Love Todd Andrew Roberts Counsel for Defendants: Michael George Descalso Andrew A. August Meagen Eileen Leary Kevin Francis Rooney William W. Schofield firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program.
/s/ JAS Chambers of Judge Whyte
AMENDED ORDER VACATING HEARING DATE --No. C-08-02248 RMW JAS 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?