Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04167/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04167-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

ROBERT-JOHN FOTI,

Plaintiff,

 v.

COUNTY OF MARIN et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 09-04167 CRB

ORDER DENYING (1) MOTION FOR

ENTRY TO COURTROOM AND (2)

MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE

The Court is in receipt of two motions from Plaintiff Robert-John Foti. 

The first, captioned a “Motion for Entry to Courtroom,” states that Plaintiff is “NOT

A TERRORIST,” but does not have state identification and has therefore missed hearings in

a different case not before this Court. The Motion asks the Court to compel enforcement of

Plaintiff’s right to attend all hearings. Plaintiff has presented no evidence that he has had

difficulty attending any hearings in this case, nor that the security procedures in this

courthouse are operating unfairly as to him. The Court therefore DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion;

if Plaintiff encounters difficulty accessing his hearings, he is of course free to raise this issue

again. 

The second motion is one for Continuance And Not Served Parties, in which Plaintiff

asserts that his service of some defendants was delayed, for various reasons. Plaintiff writes,

“LATE MARCH OR APRIL MAY BE A GOOD TIME TO HOLD ANY HEARING.” 

Though Plaintiff did not specify precisely what he seeks to continue, the Court notes that

Case 3:09-cv-04167-CRB Document 24 Filed 01/13/10 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

G:\CRBALL\2009\4167\order re two motions.wpd 2

Defendant Beverly Wood, whose Motion to Dismiss is on calendar for Friday, January 15,

2010, has apparently waived formal service. In addition, Wood’s counsel appeared at the

case management conference held on January 8, 2010. No other defendant is a party to

Wood’s Motion. The parties have both briefed that Motion. Accordingly, the Court

DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 13, 2010 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-04167-CRB Document 24 Filed 01/13/10 Page 2 of 2