Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-01059/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-01059-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 380
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Property Damage
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

JAMES MCGIBNEY, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

THOMAS RETZLAFF,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-01059-BLF 

ORDER STRIKING DECLARATIONS 

OF NON-PARTY; DENYING MOTION 

FOR RECONSIDERATION

[Re: ECF 105, 124, 144, 145, 149]

I. DECLARATIONS OF SUSAN BASKO

On November 24, 2014 and December 22, 2014, the Court received declarations from nonparty Susan Basko, which were docketed as “received” by the Clerk of the Court at ECF 105 and 

124 respectively. The Court does not construe these declarations as an attempt on Ms. Basko’s 

part to intervene in this action, but rather her effort to address the veracity of statements about her 

set forth in the parties’ papers. Nevertheless, Plaintiffs have filed a motion for Rule 11 sanctions 

against non-party Ms. Basko, ECF 144, and defendant Thomas Retzlaff—the only defending party 

in this action—seeks to strike that motion, ECF 149. 

In order to clarify any confusion arising out of the Court’s receipt of these declarations, the 

Court HEREBY STRIKES the Basko declarations (ECF 105 and 124) from the record. The Court 

shall not consider these declarations—which are, in any event, irrelevant to the issues before the 

Court—in deciding the pending substantive motions. Plaintiffs’ and Defendant’s respective 

motions concerning the Basko declarations (ECF 144 and 149) are DENIED as moot.

II. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER PERMITTING TELEPHONIC 

APPEARANCE

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Reconsider Allowing a Telephonic Appearance by Thomas Retzlaff, 

Case 5:14-cv-01059-BLF Document 152 Filed 02/10/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

ECF 145, which this Court construes as a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration 

pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9, is DENIED. Plaintiffs fail to satisfy the requirements of Civil 

Local Rule 7-9 and furthermore provide no persuasive basis for this Court to reconsider its 

discretionary decision to permit Defendant to appear by telephone at motion hearings in April.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 10, 2015

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:14-cv-01059-BLF Document 152 Filed 02/10/15 Page 2 of 2