Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_10-cv-03952/USCOURTS-cand-4_10-cv-03952-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition For Removal--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 

T.E. ARTEMIS, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

“CRATERS & FREIGHTERS SOUTH 

CHICAGO,” “FASTBEND GROUP”, 

JANET FASTABEND, JACKIE 

GUNDBERG, et al., and all employees, 

 Defendants. 

Case No: C 10-03952 SBA

ORDER 

 

On November 30, 2010, the Court dismissed the instant action, pursuant to Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), based on Plaintiff’s failure to file a response to Defendants’ 

motion to dismiss, as required by the Civil Local Rules and the Standing Orders of this 

Court. The Court issued a separate judgment on the same date. 

On December 2, 2010, Plaintiff filed what appears to be a pro se opposition to 

Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Dkt. 23. However, since the deadline to file a response to 

Defendants’ motion to dismiss has long since passed, and because the Court has already 

dismissed the action, said memorandum—which is largely unintelligible—is moot and will 

not be considered by the Court. 

On December 14, 2010, Plaintiff filed a one-page document styled as, “Request for 

Answer: Should Plaintiff be Filing a Motion for Reconsideration of Plaintiff’s Answer or 

an Appeal to District Court?” Dkt. 25. The Court does not provide legal advice to parties, 

and therefore, her request is denied. Nonetheless, Plaintiff should be aware that if she 

Case 4:10-cv-03952-SBA Document 27 Filed 01/05/11 Page 1 of 3
- 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 

intends to seek relief from the judgment entered against her on November 30, 2010, she 

may do so by filing an appropriate motion consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

59(e) and/or 60(b). Any submission to the Court must be consistent with the Civil Local 

Rules, including but not limited to Civil Local Rule 7, which governs the filing of motions 

and other requests. The Court will not consider any motion that is not filed consistent with 

the Local Rules and/or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In the event Plaintiff should 

decide to appeal, she should review Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, including but 

not limited to Rule 4, which governs the timing of appeals. Nothing in this order should be 

construed as advice to Plaintiff as to what action, if any, she should undertake. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff’s request for answer is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 1/3/11 ______________________________ 

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG 

United States District Judge 

Case 4:10-cv-03952-SBA Document 27 Filed 01/05/11 Page 2 of 3
- 3 - 

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 

ARTEMIS et al, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

CRAFTERS & FREIGHTERS SOUTH 

CHICAGO FASTABEND GROU et al, 

 Defendant. 

 / 

Case Number: CV10-03952 SBA 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District 

Court, Northern District of California. 

That on January 5, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said 

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing 

said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle 

located in the Clerk's office. 

T. E. Artemis 

#141 Iron Horse &#064; Central Station 

1801 Fourteenth Street 

Oakland, CA 94607 

Dated: January 5, 2011 

 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk 

 By: LISA R CLARK, Deputy Clerk

Case 4:10-cv-03952-SBA Document 27 Filed 01/05/11 Page 3 of 3