Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-03186/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-03186-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

ASIS INTERNET SERVICES,

Plaintiff,

 v.

RICHARD RAUSCH, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C-08-03186 EDL

ORDER

On January 19, 2010, the Court held a hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment,

which was brought against Defendant Edward Heckerson only. Defendant Heckerson did not file an

opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment despite the Court’s continuance of the December

22, 2009 hearing date to give Mr. Heckerson an opportunity to oppose. Defendant Heckerson also

failed to appear to the January 19, 2010 hearing. 

As discussed with Plaintiff’s counsel at the hearing, the Court defers ruling on Plaintiff’s

Motion. No later than February 9, 2010, Plaintiff shall either file additional declarations to support

Plaintiff’s standing to bring this lawsuit or inform the Court that Plaintiff will submit the Motion on

the evidence currently in the record. 

In addition, only Plaintiff and Defendant Heckerson have consented to the Court’s

jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Default was entered against Defendant Rausch, and

Defendant Whiting has answered the complaint but has not consented to magistrate judge

jurisdiction. Accordingly, Plaintiff shall also inform the Court by February 9, 2010 whether it will

Case 3:08-cv-03186-EDL Document 62 Filed 01/21/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

dismiss the other Defendants from this case as discussed at the hearing or whether Plaintiff requests

that the Court sever the case against Defendant Heckerson to be heard by this Court. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 21, 2010 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:08-cv-03186-EDL Document 62 Filed 01/21/10 Page 2 of 2