Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04168/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04168-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD BAKER,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CHIN & HENSOLT, INC., et al.,

Defendants

 /

No. C-09-4168 MMC

SECOND ORDER DIRECTING

PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT CHAMBERS

COPY IN COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL

ORDER 45 AND THE COURT’S

STANDING ORDERS

On January 13, 2010, plaintiff electronically filed his Second Amended Complaint

and Demand for Jury. On January 20, 2010, plaintiff, without leave of court or a stipulation

from defendants, electronically filed his Third Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury.

Plaintiff has violated General Order 45 and the Court’s Standing Order by failing to

deliver to the Clerk’s Office “no later than noon on the business day following the day that

the papers are filed electronically, one paper copy of each document that is filed

electronically . . . marked ‘Chambers Copy’ and . . . clearly marked with the judge’s name,

case number, and ‘Chambers Copy-Do Not File.’” See General Order 45 § VI.G; see also

Standing Orders for Civil Cases Assigned to the Honorable Maxine M. Chesney ¶ 2.

Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to comply with General Order 45 and the Court’s

Standing Orders by immediately submitting a chambers copy of each of the abovereferenced documents.

Case 3:09-cv-04168-MMC Document 28 Filed 01/28/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

The Court has previously advised plaintiff of his failure to comply with General Order

45 and the Court’s Standing Order in connection with earlier-filed documents. (See Order,

filed December 22, 2009.) Such reminder appears to have had little to no effect on

compelling compliance therewith.

Parties are expected to comply with court rules without repeated reminders. 

Accordingly, plaintiff is hereby advised that the Court will impose sanctions, including, but

not limited to, striking from the record any electronically-filed document of which a

chambers copy has not been timely provided to the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 28, 2010 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-04168-MMC Document 28 Filed 01/28/10 Page 2 of 2