Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_03-cv-05803/USCOURTS-cand-4_03-cv-05803-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mark Porter
Defendant
Jack Yetiv
Plaintiff

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JACK YETIV,

Plaintiff.

 v.

MARK PORTER, 

Defendant. _______________________________________

No. C 03-5803 SBA

ORDER

By Order ofthis Court, this matter was referred to binding arbitration on August 5, 2004 [Docket No.

9].

On May 24, 2005, this Court issued an Order dismissing the instant case without prejudice to being

reopened uponthe conclusionofthe arbitrationproceedings [Docket No. 11]. The Order specifically provided

that the parties could reopen the case within 60 days ofthe conclusion ofthe arbitration proceedings, provided

that the parties notified the Court in writing. In the Order, the Court also granted leave to any party to state

his objection to the dismissal, and to clarify whether there remained any issues for the Court to resolve that

would justify leaving the case open on its active docket. The parties were directed to file their objections with

the Court on or before June 4, 2005.

On June 3, 2005, Plaintifftimely filed his objection [Docket No. 13]. In his objection, Plaintiff requests

that the case be restored to the Court's active docket because "limitations may preclude re-opening the case

at a later time" and because he "would appreciate being able to resort to this Court should it become

necessary." However, Plaintiff does not state that the arbitration proceedings have concluded, or identify any

issues that require the Court's current attention. Since the Court's May 24, 2005 Order does not preclude

Plaintiff from reopening the case once the arbitration proceedings have concluded, Plaintiff has not provided

the Court with a sufficient reason to keep the instant matter open on its active docket at this time.

Case 4:03-cv-05803-SBA Document 14 Filed 06/10/05 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

2

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's objection is DENIED. This case shall remain

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO BEING REOPENED upon the conclusion of the arbitration

proceedings. Upon written application by any party within 60 days of the conclusion of the arbitration

proceedings, this matter shall be reopened and restored to the active civil calendar. Failure to move to reopen

the matter within 60 days ofthe conclusion ofthe arbitration proceedings will result in this dismissal becoming

final, absent any extension of time previously granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Saundra Brown Armstrong

Dated: 6/8/05 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:03-cv-05803-SBA Document 14 Filed 06/10/05 Page 2 of 2