Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02315/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02315-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bill Lewis
Plaintiff
John E. Potter
Defendant

Document Text:

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

BILL LEWIS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

JOHN E. POTTER,

Defendant. /

No. C 06-02315 CRB

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

VACATE SETTLEMENT

Now pending before the Court is the motion of pro se plaintiff Bill Lewis to set aside

the settlement in this action. Plaintiff claims that he made the Magistrate Judge who

facilitated the September 2006 settlement aware that plaintiff agreed to settle because

defendant’s officials led plaintiff to believe that Nathan Griffins was no longer employed by

the United States Postal Service. Plaintiff claims further that he recently learned that Nathan

Griffins remained employed by the Postal Service until May or June, 2007.

Plaintiff’s motion, which is unaccompanied by any sworn declaration, is DENIED. 

Plaintiff does not contend that the government made any misrepresentations to him during

the settlement proceedings, and the government’s sworn declaration in opposition to

defendant’s motion demonstrates as a fact that it did not. Moreover, as plaintiff concedes,

and as is reflected in the declaration submitted by the government, Mr. Griffins is not

currently employed by the Postal Service. Even if plaintiff’s unsworn allegations are true, he 

Case 3:06-cv-02315-CRB Document 31 Filed 12/05/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

G:\CRBALL\2006\2315\orderdenyingmotion.wpd 2

has not demonstrated that he was induced by fraud to enter into the settlement agreement or

that the termination of Mr. Griffins’ employment in June 2007 rather than October 2006 is a

material fact that renders the settlement void.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 5, 2007 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-02315-CRB Document 31 Filed 12/05/07 Page 2 of 2