WALKER v. ARAMART CORPORATION, et al

Filing 25

ORDER re 24 MOTION (Objections) for Clarification to 23 Order Staying Case filed by JEFFREY JEROME WALKER: Any further objections to orders entered in this case should be clearly designated as Objections pursuant to Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and directed to the attention of the district judge. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE ALLAN KORNBLUM on 4/16/2009. (jws)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION JEFFREY JEROME WALKER, Plaintiff, vs. ARAMARK INDUSTRIES, et al, Defendants. / ORDER Presently before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Clarification. (Doc. 24). The Court has already explained why it thinks the present case is connected to Case No. 5:05cv75-MD (doc. 18), despite Plaintiff's repeated efforts to convince it otherwise. (Docs. 14, 17, 21, and 24). Any further objections to orders entered in this case should be clearly designated as "Objections" pursuant to Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and directed to the attention of the district judge. DONE AND ORDERED this 16th day of April, 2009. CASE NO. 4:08CV360-MP/AK s/ A. KORNBLUM ALLAN KORNBLUM UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?