DOE v. COUNTY OF KERN, 1:15-cv-01637-JLT. (2017)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20170504a40
Visitors: 7
Filed: May 03, 2017
Latest Update: May 03, 2017
Summary: ORDER GRANTING OBJECTION TO THE PRETRIAL ORDER JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . As pointed out by Mr. Navejar (Doc. 46), in the pretrial order, in the "Jurisdiction/Venue" section, the Court erroneously referred to "42 U.S.C. 1332" and indicated the Court's jurisdiction was based in diversity Not only is this an error in referencing the diversity statute, which is 28 U.S.C. 1332, but, of course, the Court's jurisdiction is not based upon diversity. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 1.
Summary: ORDER GRANTING OBJECTION TO THE PRETRIAL ORDER JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . As pointed out by Mr. Navejar (Doc. 46), in the pretrial order, in the "Jurisdiction/Venue" section, the Court erroneously referred to "42 U.S.C. 1332" and indicated the Court's jurisdiction was based in diversity Not only is this an error in referencing the diversity statute, which is 28 U.S.C. 1332, but, of course, the Court's jurisdiction is not based upon diversity. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 1. ..
More
ORDER GRANTING OBJECTION TO THE PRETRIAL ORDER
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
As pointed out by Mr. Navejar (Doc. 46), in the pretrial order, in the "Jurisdiction/Venue" section, the Court erroneously referred to "42 U.S.C. § 1332" and indicated the Court's jurisdiction was based in diversity Not only is this an error in referencing the diversity statute, which is 28 U.S.C. § 1332, but, of course, the Court's jurisdiction is not based upon diversity. Thus, the Court ORDERS:
1. Mr. Navejar's objection to the pretrial order is GRANTED;
2. The pretrial order (Doc. 43 at I, line 21) is amended to read, "This court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C § 1331."
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
