Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05457/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05457-16/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Allan D. Grushkin
Plaintiff
Security National Properties Holding Company, LLC
Defendant

Document Text:

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

ALLAN D. GRUSHKIN,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SECURITY NATIONAL PROPERTIES

HOLDING COMPANY, LLC,

Defendant.

 /

No. C-13-5457 MMC

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION TO VACATE STIPULATED

JUDGMENT; VACATING STIPULATED

JUDGMENT; RETAINING JURISDICTION

TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS

Before the Court is defendant’s “Motion to Vacate Judgment and to Dismiss the

Case for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction,” filed October 2, 2015, pursuant to Rule

60(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff has filed opposition, to which

defendant has replied. The matter came on regularly for hearing on December 4, 2015. 

Ryan F. Thomas of Johnston | Thomas appeared on behalf of plaintiff. Benjamin C.

Johnson of the Boesch Law Group appeared on behalf of defendant. Having considered

the parties’ respective written submissions and the arguments of counsel, the Court rules

as follows.

Case 3:13-cv-05457-MMC Document 63 Filed 12/22/15 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

1. For the reasons stated on the record at the hearing, the Court hereby GRANTS

defendant’s motion, and, accordingly, VACATES the stipulated judgment filed by the

parties and entered by the Court on May 28, 2015.

2. Notwithstanding the above ruling, the Court hereby RETAINS jurisdiction to

determine whether an attorney or party to the instant action “has abused the judicial

process, and, if so, what sanction would be appropriate.” See Willy v. Coastal Corp., 503

U.S. 131, 138, 139 n.5 (1992) (holding “sanction[s] may constitutionally be applied even

when subject-matter jurisdiction is eventually found lacking”).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 22, 2015 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-05457-MMC Document 63 Filed 12/22/15 Page 2 of 2