From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. UAL, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 13, 2012
Case No.: 12-CV-3781 YGR (N.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2012)

Opinion

Case No.: 12-CV-3781 YGR

12-13-2012

ANTHONY L. WILLIAMS Plaintiff, v. UAL, INC., ET AL., Defendants.


ORDER STRIKING FILING, DOCKET NO. 49,

ON THE COURT'S OWN MOTION

Plaintiff Anthony L. Williams ("Plaintiff") filed "A Notice to All Parties in the Above Entitled Action" on November 21, 2012. (Dkt No. 49, "Notice".) The Notice purports to stay these proceedings "until such time as the Justice Department can order a Case Remand back to State Jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. 2283)." It goes on to state that "[n]o further filings, actions or orders, including filings by any Defendant is permitted EXCEPT an Order of Remand By the District Court."

The Court, on its own motion, STRIKES the Notice as filed improperly and without supporting authority. The authority cited by Plaintiff, 28 U.S.C. § 2283, states only that a federal court may not enjoin state court proceedings except under limited circumstances. There is no injunction of state court proceedings at issue here. Moreover, the Court is aware of no legal basis warranting a stay of the order denying Plaintiff's Motion for Remand.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE


Summaries of

Williams v. UAL, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Dec 13, 2012
Case No.: 12-CV-3781 YGR (N.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2012)
Case details for

Williams v. UAL, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY L. WILLIAMS Plaintiff, v. UAL, INC., ET AL., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Dec 13, 2012

Citations

Case No.: 12-CV-3781 YGR (N.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2012)

Citing Cases

Williams v. Perez

Plaintiff then filed suit in California state court against the Secretary of Labor, certain Department of…

Smith v. United Airlines, Inc.

"[T]he six-month period generally begins to run when an employee knows or should know of the alleged breach…