Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-00078/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-00078-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

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

OAKLAND DIVISION

ILLUMINATION DYNAMICS CO., LTD., a 

foreign company,

Plaintiff,

vs.

PACIFIC LIGHTING SOLUTIONS L.L.C.,

and BILL ZHANG, an individual,

Defendants.

Case No: C 14-0078 SBA

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S 

EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR 

ISSUANCE OF FURTHER 

INSTRUCTIONS RE: ORDER 

GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 

MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM 

NON-DISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL 

ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This is a breach of contract action brought by Plaintiff Illumination Dynamics 

(“Plaintiff”) against Defendants Pacific Lighting Solutions L.L.C. (“PLS”) and Bill Zhang 

(“Zhang”). Prior to the action’s reassignment to this Court, the Magistrate Judge presiding 

over the action granted Plaintiff’s request for a Writ of Attachment which was served on 

PLS and third party Menard, Inc. (“Menard”). Dkt. 14, 35. Pursuant to the writ, Menard 

deposited the sum of $183,504.60 with the Court. Dkt. 78. On August 18, 2014, the Court 

granted PLS’ Motion for Relief from Non-Dispositive Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge 

and vacated the Writ. Dkt. 69. That order, however, did not address the disposition of the 

funds deposited with the Court by Menard.

On December 16, 2014, PLS filed an Ex Parte Application for Issuance of Further 

Instructions Re: Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for Relief from Non-Dispositive 

Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge. Dkt. 80. Specifically, PLS requests that the Court 

direct the Clerk to release and return the sum of $183,504.60 to Menard. However, Menard 

is not a party to this action and has made no request regarding the disposition of the funds it 

previously deposited with this Court. In addition, PLS has made no showing that it has the 

authority to submit any requests to this Court ostensibly on Menard’s behalf. Accordingly, 

Case 4:14-cv-00078-SBA Document 83 Filed 01/30/15 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

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT PLS’ Ex Parte Application for Issuance of 

Further Instructions Re: Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for Relief from NonDispositive Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 1/30/15 ______________________________

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:14-cv-00078-SBA Document 83 Filed 01/30/15 Page 2 of 2