From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bierly v. Amann

United States District Court, D. Utah
Jun 1, 2004
Case No. 2:03CV639DAK (D. Utah Jun. 1, 2004)

Opinion

Case No. 2:03CV639DAK

June 1, 2004


ORDER RE-OPENING CASE


On May 27, 2004, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Ask the Court to Re-Open this Civil Case Due to Inadequate Notification and Incorrect Address. Plaintiff asserts that she did not receive a copy of the April 2, 2004 Report and Recommendation, recommending that Plaintiffs case be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as to all Defendants, or the court's April 20, 2004 Order, adopting the Report and Recommendation and dismissing the case.

Based on the documents attached to Plaintiff's motion, it appears that the Report and Recommendation and Order were sent to one of Plaintiff's previous addresses. Because Plaintiff did not receive a copy of the Report and Recommendation or have an opportunity to file an objection before this court issued its Order dismissing the case, this court will re-open the case and allow Plaintiff to file an objection within ten days of her receipt of this Order. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is granted.

The clerk's office is directed to mail a copy of the April 2, 2004 Report and Recommendation and all future documents to Plaintiff's current address, 6809 So. 500 East, Midvale, Utah 84047.


Summaries of

Bierly v. Amann

United States District Court, D. Utah
Jun 1, 2004
Case No. 2:03CV639DAK (D. Utah Jun. 1, 2004)
Case details for

Bierly v. Amann

Case Details

Full title:ELIZABETH BIERLY, Plaintiff(s) v. PAUL AMANN, et al., Defendant(s)

Court:United States District Court, D. Utah

Date published: Jun 1, 2004

Citations

Case No. 2:03CV639DAK (D. Utah Jun. 1, 2004)