Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01358/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01358-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1145 E.R.I.S.A.

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES P. DeFAZIO,

Plaintiff,

v. NO. CIV. S-04-1358 LKK/GGH

HOLLISTER, INC., Plan 

Administrator; et al., O R D E R

Defendants.

 /

The court is in receipt defendants’ motion to vacate the

January 9, 2007 order reassigning the above captioned case to this

court. The motion is set to be heard on the March 26, 2007 law and

motion calender. 

The court briefly sets forth additional facts about the

recusal and subsequent reassignment of the pending case. The court

initially disqualified itself when it learned that the law firm of

Porter, Scott, Weiberg & Delehant (attorneys for plaintiff Kathleen

Ellis in this case) was representing the Sacramento Public

Defenders’ Office in a Section 1983 case. The judge’s wife, a

Case 2:04-cv-01358-WBS-GGH Document 169 Filed 02/07/07 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

2

public defender for the County, was a named defendant. The case,

Ware v. Sacramento County et. al., 06-00913 RRB, has since been

dismissed and the time for appeal has run. Soon thereafter, the

pending case was reassigned to this court.

With these facts in mind, the court requests that the parties

brief the issues raised by the pending motion. Accordingly, the

court orders as follows: 

1. Plaintiffs shall file oppositions or statements of nonopposition no later than March 12, 2007. Reply briefs,

if any, shall be filed no later than March 19, 2007.

Oral argument is set for March 26, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. on

the court’s regularly scheduled law and motion calendar.

2. The motions set to be heard on the February 20, 2007 law

and motion calendar are hereby STAYED pending resolution

of defendants’ motion to vacate. 

3. Defendants’ ex parte application for a continuance of

the hearing date on the pending motions is DENIED as

moot. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: February 7, 2007.

Case 2:04-cv-01358-WBS-GGH Document 169 Filed 02/07/07 Page 2 of 2