Abrazado v. The Government State of California et al

Filing 71

ORDER RE: CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 10/06/2010. (hrllc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/6/2010)

Download PDF
Abrazado v. The Government State of California et al Doc. 71 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ** E-filed October 6, 2010 ** NOT FOR CITATION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION CHARMAIN A. ABRAZADO, Plaintiff, v. THE GOVERNMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/ The order that follows is based on the discussion at the October 5, 2010 Case Management Conference. Pro se plaintiff ("Plaintiff") alone appeared at the conference because she has not yet served any defendant with the complaint and summons. Plaintiff filed her complaint on July 20, 2010. (Docket No. 1.) As Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 requires that a plaintiff must serve a defendant within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the Court advised Plaintiff that she must properly serve defendants by November 17, 2010. In addition, the Court strongly instructed Plaintiff not to submit any more purported "evidence" to the Court until further notice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 6, 2010 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE United States District Court 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 No. C10-03163 HRL ORDER RE: CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE For the Northern District of California HOWARD R. LLOYD Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 C10-03163-HRL Please see General Order 45 Section IX C.2 and D; Notice has NOT been electronically mailed to: Charmain A. Abrazado PO Box 4234 Santa Clara, CA 95056 Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program. United States District Court 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 For the Northern District of California 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?