Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-03907/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-03907-0/pdf.json

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHAO XI TAN and YUE MEI TAN

individually and as successors-in-interest to

JERRY TAN, deceased,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,

et. al.,

Defendants /

No. C-03-3907 MMC

ORDER CONTINUING DEADLINE FOR

CERTIFICATION

On April 13, 2005, the Court dismissed the above-titled action without prejudice,

after being notified that the parties had agreed to a settlement, but ordered that if any party

certified to the Court, within ninety days, that the agreed consideration for the settlement

had not been delivered over, the dismissal would be vacated and the case would be

restored to the calendar to be set for trial.

On July 11, 2005, defendants electronically filed a stipulated request for dismissal

signed by all parties. Later that day, however, counsel for plaintiffs electronically filed a

certificate stating that the agreed consideration for the settlement had not been paid and

requesting that the matter be restored to the calendar and set for trial. In that certificate,

plaintiff’s counsel further stated that the signed stipulation of dismissal was not to be filed
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

by defendants unless and until payment of the settlement had been made. Shortly

thereafter, on July 12, 2005, defendants electronically filed a certification asking the Court

to disregard the stipulation which, defendants state, was filed in error.

In light of plaintiff’s certification filed July 11, 2005, and defendants’ subsequent

certification, the Court hereby CONTINUES to September 7, 2005, the date by which either

party may certify the agreed consideration has not been delivered.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 12, 2005 /s/ Maxine M. Chesney 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge