Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-02135/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-02135-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:25 Clayton Act

---

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

- 1 - 08CV2135 MMA (NLS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT CURTIS BASS, INC.

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 08CV2135 MMA (NLS)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

REQUEST TO SUBSTITUTE

ROBERT CURTIS BASS, INC. AS

PLAINTIFF IN THIS ACTION

[Doc. No. 55]

vs.

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, et al.,

Defendants.

On February 9, 2009, Plaintiff Robert Curtis Bass filed a Motion to Amend his First

Amended Complaint (“FAC”). [Doc. No. 55]. In the motion, Plaintiff seeks to amend the

complaint for the sole purpose of having the Court and Defendants acknowledge that the aboveentitled action was “initially filed with the Court on behalf of the Plaintiff as a corporate party and

its’ [sic] legal representative was and is authorized to act as the Attorney in Fact and Pro Querente

(For the Plaintiff).” Mot. to Amend at 1:26–27. Plaintiff asserts that, 

The Court erred when it issued its [sic] order denying the Plaintiff’s legal representative,

Robert C Bass to act as the authorized and assigned ‘Attorney in Fact’ on behalf of the

Plaintiff ROBERT CURTIS BASS, along with entering the Plaintiff’s legal status as Pro

Se in error and inadvertently issuing all judgments and previous orders under the

presumption that Plaintiff’s legal representative was also bringing the civil action in his

own person and subsequently assuming that the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s legal

representative was allegedly practicing law without a license.

Id. at 1:28–2:4. On February 10, 2009, the Court issued an Order that Plaintiff file the proposed

Second Amended Complaint as an exhibit to the motion, reflecting the change in caption heading

Case 3:08-cv-02135-MMA-NLS Document 62 Filed 02/20/09 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 - 08CV2135 MMA (NLS)

to “Robert Curtis Bass, Inc.”. [Doc. No. 58]. Later that day, Plaintiff objected to the Court’s order

and refused to attach the proposed amended complaint. [Doc. No. 58]. Having considered the

motion, and Plaintiff’s assertions that the above-entitled action was filed originally on behalf of

Robert Curtis Bass, Inc., a corporation, and not Robert Curtis Bass, an individual, the Court,

having found good cause, GRANTS Plaintiff’s request and HEREBY ORDERS the substitution

of “Robert Curtis Bass, Inc.” as Plaintiff in place of “Robert Curtis Bass. ” The Clerk of the Court

shall modify the docket to reflect “Robert Curtis Bass, Inc.” in place of “Robert Curtis Bass.”

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 20, 2009

Hon. Michael M. Anello

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-02135-MMA-NLS Document 62 Filed 02/20/09 Page 2 of 2