Johnson v. Ram et al
Filing
20
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/14/11 ORDERING that on or before 12/2/11, defendant Shadi Ram shall file an amended answer to plaintiff's complaint; on or before 12/2/11, defendant Avtar Chamber shall file an answer to p laintiff's complaint; on or before 12/2/11, defendant Shadi Ram shall file a notice with the court, preferably on the form that accompanied the Order Setting Status Conference in this case (see Dkt. No. 4, Doc. No. 4-2), whether he consents to or declines the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. (Becknal, R)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SCOTT N. JOHNSON,
11
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:11-cv-01322 KJM KJN PS
v.
SHADI RAM, Individually and d/b/a
One Stop Mart; AVTAR CHAMBER,
Individually and d/b/a One Stop Mart;
RAM MARKETS, Inc., a California
Corporation,
16
Defendants.
ORDER
/
17
18
On October 21, 2011, the undersigned entered an Order and Status (Pretrial
19
Scheduling) Order (“Scheduling Order”) in this case (Dkt. No. 16).1 The Scheduling Order did
20
not set a date for either the final pretrial scheduling conference or the trial in this case because the
21
court lacked information required to properly set those dates. Accordingly, the Scheduling Order
22
required that on or before November 10, 2011: (1) “defendant Shadi Ram shall file an amended
23
answer with the court”; (2) “defendant Avtar Chamber shall file an answer with the court”;
24
(3) “all parties shall file a notice with the court, preferably on the form that accompanied the
25
1
26
This action proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California
Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
1
1
Order Setting Status Conference in this case (see Dkt. No. 4, Doc. No. 4-2), whether they consent
2
to or decline the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge.” (Scheduling Order at 10.)
3
A review of the court’s docket reveals that some of the parties have not complied
4
with the court’s Scheduling Order. First, defendant Shadi Ram did not file an amended answer
5
to the complaint on or before November 10, 2011. Second, defendant Avtar Chamber did not
6
file an answer to the complaint on or before November 10, 2011. Third, although plaintiff and
7
Mr. Chamber filed notices consenting to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge (Dkt. Nos. 17,
8
19), Mr. Ram has not filed a notice indicating whether he consents to the jurisdiction of the
9
magistrate judge.2 By this order, the undersigned provides Mr. Ram and Mr. Chamber with
10
additional time to comply with the Scheduling Order.
11
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
12
1.
13
On or before December 2, 2011, defendant Shadi Ram shall file an
amended answer to plaintiff’s complaint.
14
2.
On or before December 2, 2011, defendant Avtar Chamber shall file an
15
answer to plaintiff’s complaint.
16
3.
On or before December 2, 2011, defendant Shadi Ram shall file a notice
17
with the court, preferably on the form that accompanied the Order Setting Status Conference in
18
this case (see Dkt. No. 4, Doc. No. 4-2), whether he consents to or declines the jurisdiction of the
19
magistrate judge.
20
21
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: November 14, 2011
22
_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
23
24
25
2
26
On November 9, 2011, Mr. Ram and Mr. Chamber filed an updated status report with the
court (Dkt. No. 18). The court did not require such a filing.
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?
