Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

BENSON v. ENLOE MEDICAL CENTER, 2:15-CV-2053-JAM-CMK. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20171012d12 Visitors: 9
Filed: Oct. 11, 2017
Latest Update: Oct. 11, 2017
Summary: ORDER CRAIG M. KELLISON , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. On November 12, 2015, the matter was stayed pending arbitration. On September 8, 2017, defendants filed a status report indicating that a final binding arbitration decision had been issued on July 7, 2017, and that a stipulation for dismissal of this action had been sent to plaintiff on August 28, 2017. On September 7, 2017, plaintiff filed a statement indicating that he intended to a
More

ORDER

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. On November 12, 2015, the matter was stayed pending arbitration. On September 8, 2017, defendants filed a status report indicating that a final binding arbitration decision had been issued on July 7, 2017, and that a stipulation for dismissal of this action had been sent to plaintiff on August 28, 2017. On September 7, 2017, plaintiff filed a statement indicating that he intended to appeal the arbitration award and does not agree to a stipulated dismissal of the action. On September 21, 2017, plaintiff filed in this court a "Notice of Appeal" on a California Judicial Council form. In this filing, plaintiff seeks an order vacating the arbitration award.

Pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 230(b), "all motions shall be noticed on the motion calendar of the assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge." Pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21), all matters in actions where, as here, the plaintiff is proceeding pro se shall be referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge. In this case, plaintiff has failed to notice his motion on the undersigned's motion calendar. Therefore, the motion will be stricken. Plaintiff may re-file his motion along with a notice of motion setting the matter on the undersigned's motion calendar.

Given resolution of arbitration proceedings, the stay issued on November 12, 2015, is lifted and defendants shall file a response to the complaint within 30 days of the date of this order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion (Doc. 13) is stricken for lack of proper notice; and

2. The stay of proceedings issued on November 12, 2015, is lifted; and

3. Defendants shall file a response to the complaint within 30 days of the date of this order.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer