Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02249/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02249-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

ORDER RE: RULE 60 REQUEST TO CORRECT DISMISSAL 

TO REFLECT THAT FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST 

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO WAS NOT DISMISSED 

CASE NO. C-13-2249-WBS-DAD

1 P012

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 

Russell A. Robinson, SBN 163937 

Law Office of Russell A. Robinson 

345 Grove Street, 1st Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94102 

TEL: (415) 255-0462 

FAX: (415) 431-4526 

rlaw345@gmail.com

Counsel for Plaintiff 

CHARLET INTHAVONGXAY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CHARLET INTHAVONGXAY,

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, ET AL., 

 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 2:13-cv-02249-WBS-DAD 

ORDER GRANTING RULE 60 REQUEST TO 

CORRECT DISMISSAL TO REFLECT THAT 

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST 

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO WAS NOT 

DISMISSED AND RESTORING THIS ACTION 

TO THE CIVIL ACTIVE LIST

[Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules 41(a) and 

60(a)] 

Trial Date: None Set 

[Jury Trial Demanded]

On October 7, 2014, Plaintiff CHARLET INTHAVONGXAY caused to be dismissed 

without prejudice, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a), Defendant KATHERINE 

NICKERSON; the Second and Third Causes of Action; and, Paragraphs 21 and 22 of her Complaint 

(conspiracy). [Docket Number (DN) 14] 

Thereafter, the entire matter was dismissed without prejudice. 

Plaintiff immediately filed a Rule 60(a) application, for a correction to the Court’s system, 

which Rule permits the Court to ”correct a clerical mistake or a mistake arising from oversight or 

Case 2:13-cv-02249-WBS-DB Document 20 Filed 10/08/14 Page 1 of 2
ORDER RE: RULE 60 REQUEST TO CORRECT DISMISSAL 

TO REFLECT THAT FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST 

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO WAS NOT DISMISSED 

CASE NO. C-13-2249-WBS-DAD

2 P012

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 

omission whenever one is found in a judgment, order, or other part of the record. The court may do so 

on motion or on its own, with or without notice. . . .”

Good cause appearing, it is hereby ordered as follows: 

The dismissal without prejudice, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a), only 

Defendant KATHERINE NICKERSON; the Second and Third Causes of Action; and, Paragraphs 21 

and 22 of her Complaint (conspiracy), is GRANTED. 

The Application to restore this case to the Civil Active list (and to re-open this matter) is 

GRANTED. The First cause of Action (Title VII) alleged against the County of Sacramento shall 

proceed and said cause of action and said defendant not be dismissed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: October 8, 2014 

Case 2:13-cv-02249-WBS-DB Document 20 Filed 10/08/14 Page 2 of 2