Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00656/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00656-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LISA MOORE, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-656-JAM-KJN

ORDER

On March 11, 2014, the instant action was removed to this court from the Solano County 

Superior Court. (ECF No. 2.) Because it appeared from the papers attached to the notice of 

removal that plaintiffs Lisa Moore and Eugene Moore were proceeding without counsel, the 

action was referred to the undersigned pursuant to E.D. Cal. L.R. 302(c)(21). 

Thereafter, on March 18, 2014, defendants City of Vallejo and Vallejo Police Department 

filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which was noticed 

for hearing before the undersigned on May 8, 2014. (ECF No. 8.) Plaintiffs’ opposition or 

statement of non-opposition to the motion pursuant to Local Rule 230 is presently due on April 

24, 2014. However, on April 18, 2014, attorney Michael Joseph Haddad of the law firm Haddad 

& Sherwin filed a notice of appearance, indicating that Mr. Haddad and several other attorneys 

from his law firm would represent plaintiffs in this matter. (ECF No. 10.) 

////

Case 2:14-cv-00656-JAM-KJN Document 11 Filed 04/21/14 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

Local Rule 302(c)(21) provides that magistrate judges shall conduct all appropriate pretrial proceedings in “actions in which all the plaintiffs or defendants are proceeding in propria 

persona, including dispositive and non-dispositive motions and matters. Actions initially 

assigned to a Magistrate Judge under this paragraph shall be referred back to the assigned Judge if 

a party appearing in propria persona is later represented by an attorney in accordance with L.R. 

180.” E.D. Cal. L.R. 302(c)(21).

In light of the appearance of counsel on plaintiffs’ behalf, and with defendants also 

represented by counsel, neither all the plaintiffs nor all the defendants in this action are 

proceeding in propria persona. Therefore, further proceedings in this action, other than discovery 

motions and other matters appropriately referred to the undersigned under the court’s Local 

Rules, should now be noticed before the United States District Judge assigned to this action. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This matter, including the pending motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8) is referred to the 

United States District Judge assigned to this action. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 302(c)(21).

2. All dates pending before the undersigned are VACATED. Defendants shall promptly 

re-notice the pending motion to dismiss for hearing on an available date before the 

assigned district judge, with briefing deadlines pursuant to Local Rule 230 to be 

computed based on the continued hearing date. 

3. Henceforth the caption on documents filed in this action shall be No. 2:14-cv-656

JAM KJN.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April 21, 2014

 

Case 2:14-cv-00656-JAM-KJN Document 11 Filed 04/21/14 Page 2 of 2