Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01435/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01435-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DHILLON R. SINGH and KERN LERDO 

NUTS, Inc., 

Plaintiffs,

v.

HANCOCK NATURAL RESOURCES 

GROUP, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:15-CV-01435-LJO-JLT

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR RELIEF 

FROM JUDGMENT AND VACATING 

APRIL 11, 2016 HEARING

(Doc. 24) 

Plaintiffs Dhillon R. Singh and Kern Lerdo Nuts, Inc. (“Plaintiffs”) have moved pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) (“Rule 60(b)”) for relief) from the Court’s March 3, 2016 

Order granting Defendants’ unopposed motions to dismiss their complaint for lack of jurisdiction. 

Doc. 24. According to their Motion, Plaintiffs failed to file a timely response to Defendants’ 

motions because on or around the beginning of February 2016, their previous attorney notified them 

that he had suffered a heart attack and could no longer represent them in these proceedings. Id., at 4. 

Plaintiffs were unable to retain a new attorney prior to the filing deadline of February 14, 2016. Id., 

at 5. Defendants do not oppose this Motion. Docs. 26-27. 

Case 1:15-cv-01435-LJO-JLT Document 28 Filed 04/01/16 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

Under Rule 60(b), the Court may relieve a party from a final judgment or order because of 

mistake, inadvertence, surprise, excusable neglect, or “any other reason that justifies relief.” The 

Court finds that Plaintiffs have established such grounds for relief from the Court’s March 3, 2016 

Order. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDERS 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Relief from Judgment (Doc. 24) is GRANTED. The Clerk of the 

Court is directed to VACATE the Court’s March 3, 2016 Judgment and Order granting 

Defendants’ motions to dismiss and REOPEN the case so that Plaintiffs may file an

amended complaint. The amended complaint is due no later than seven (7) days from the 

date this Order is filed. 

2. The hearing on Plaintiffs’ motion, currently set for April 11, 2016 at 8:30 am, is 

VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 31, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01435-LJO-JLT Document 28 Filed 04/01/16 Page 2 of 2