Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

JOHNSON v. SAINI, 2:14-cv-1086-LKK-KJN-PS. (2014)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20140807b46 Visitors: 17
Filed: Aug. 06, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 06, 2014
Summary: ORDER KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge. On June 2, 2014, defendant Parminder Kaur Saini ("Saini"), proceeding pro se, filed an answer to the complaint. (ECF No. 7.) Therein, Saini stated that she has been "sued incorrectly herein as India Merchandise Group, Inc.," the other defendant named in this action. ( Id. at 1.) On June 6, 2014, Saini consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge. (ECF No. 8.) On July 14, 2014, plaintiff filed a proposed joint status report; the signature line
More

ORDER

KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

On June 2, 2014, defendant Parminder Kaur Saini ("Saini"), proceeding pro se, filed an answer to the complaint. (ECF No. 7.) Therein, Saini stated that she has been "sued incorrectly herein as India Merchandise Group, Inc.," the other defendant named in this action. (Id. at 1.) On June 6, 2014, Saini consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge. (ECF No. 8.) On July 14, 2014, plaintiff filed a proposed joint status report; the signature line for defendant was prepared solely for Saini who did not sign the status report or otherwise responded to the May 2, 2014 Order Setting Status Conference. (ECF No. 9 at 7.)

Based on the above filings and statements, the presiding District Judge determined that "the only defendant who has appeared in this action is proceeding in propria persona." (ECF No. 10 at 2.) Accordingly, on July 23, 2014, the District Judge ordered that further pre-trial proceedings in this action be assigned to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21).1 (Id.)

In light of the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. A status conference in this matter is set for Thursday, September 18, 2014, at 10:00 a.m., in courtroom number 25 before the undersigned.

2. No later than September 11, 2014, the parties shall file status reports, preferably a joint status report, addressing the specific topics outlined in the court's previous May 2, 2014 order setting status conference. (See ECF No. 4 at 4-5.) The parties shall also be prepared to discuss the issue of whether the India Merchandise Group, Inc., the other currently-named defendant, has been properly sued in this action. (See ECF No. 10 at 2.)

3. Failure to timely file a status report may result in sanctions, including a potential recommendation that this case be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or other appropriate sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. The District Judge also ordered the following: "If it subsequently appears that the corporate defendant has been properly sued in this action and appears through counsel, see Local Rule 183(a), this action shall be referred back to the district court." (ECF No. 9 at 2.)
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