Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01832/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01832-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 720
Nature of Suit: Labor Management Relations Act
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Labor/Mgmnt. Relations

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMAS H. DENT, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

ALLEN A. WAGGONER )

CONSTRUCTION, INC., a California )

Corporation; ALLEN A. WAGGONER, )

an individual; and DOES 1 through 100, )

 inclusive, )

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

1:07-CV-1823 AWI DLB

ORDER VACATING PORTION

OF THE APRIL 14, 2008

ORDER THAT REMANDED

THIS ACTION

ORDER REQUESTING THE

SUPERIOR COURT OF

CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

STANISLAUS TO RETURN

CASE NUMBER 619310

On April 9, 2008, the parties filed a stipulation to dismiss the Ninth and Tenth Causes of

Action. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-143(b) “[s]tipulations are not effective unless approved the

by Court.” Local Rule 83-143(b) requires that “a proposed order shall be submitted with a

written stipulation and may consist of an endorsement on the stipulation of the words, ‘IT IS SO

ORDERS,’ with spaces designated for the date and signature to the Judge or Magistrate Judge.”

On April 10, 2008, a stipulation was submitted to the e-mail mailbox for the

undersigned’s proposed orders. Unlike the filed stipulation, this document also states that the

parties agreed to remand this action to the Superior Court of California, County of Stanislaus. 

On April 11, 2008, the court signed an order, which followed the language of the e-mailed

stipulation, and the court ordered the Ninth and Tenth Causes of Action dismissed and ordered

the case remanded. This order was docketed and served on April 14, 2008.

Case 1:07-cv-01832-DLB Document 35 Filed 04/15/08 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

A review of the stipulation filed by the parties on April 9, 2008, indicates that they did

not stipulate to remand this action. The court has discretion to reconsider and vacate a prior

order. Barber v. Hawaii, 42 F.3d 1185, 1198 (9 Cir.1994); United States v. Nutri-cology, Inc., th

982 F.2d 394, 396 (9 Cir.1992). Because the court’s April 14, 2008 order remanding this

th

action was based solely on an inaccurate representation in an e-mailed document, the court had

no basis to remand the action. Thus, the court will vacate the April 14, 2008 order to the extent

it remanded this action.

Accordingly, the court makes the following conclusions:

1. The court HEREBY VACATES the portion of the April 14, 2008 order

remanding this action;

2. The court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to serve a copy of this order on

the parties and on the Superior Court of the California, County of

Stanislaus; and

3. The court REQUESTS that the Superior Court of the California, County of

Stanislaus return County of Stanislaus, Case Number 619310.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 14, 2008 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-01832-DLB Document 35 Filed 04/15/08 Page 2 of 2