Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings Benworth Oto Cand 433897 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin for all furthe…

Court filing

ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin for all further… — Benworth Oto (Dkt. 13)

No. 4:24-cv-04840-AMO · Doc. 13 · Docket on CourtListener

Summary

An Order Reassigning Case filed August 15, 2024 as Document 13 in Benworth Capital Partners, LLC v. Oto Analytics, LLC, Case No. 24-cv-04840-LB, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The order reassigns the case to Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin in the San Francisco division for all further proceedings and instructs counsel that future filings bear the initials AMO after the case number. All scheduled hearing and trial dates are vacated, while existing briefing schedules, ADR compliance deadlines and discovery cutoffs remain unchanged. Motions must be renoticed for hearing before the new judge without affecting the prior briefing schedule. The one-page order carries the name of Mark B. Busby, Clerk of the court.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

                                        Case 4:24-cv-04840-AMO           Document 13        Filed 08/15/24      Page 1 of 1




                                   1

                                   2

                                   3

                                   4                                  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                                   5                                 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

                                   6

                                   7     BENWORTH CAPITAL PARTNERS,                         Case No. 24-cv-04840-LB
                                         LLC,
                                   8                    Plaintiff,                          ORDER REASSIGNING CASE
                                   9             v.
                                  10
                                         OTO ANALYTICS, LLC,
                                  11                    Defendant.
                                  12


 United States District Court
                                  13          IT IS ORDERED that this case is reassigned to the Honorable Araceli Martinez-Olguin in

                                  14   the San Francisco division for all further proceedings. Counsel are instructed that all future filings

                                  15   shall bear the initials AMO immediately after the case number.



Northern District of California
                                  16          All hearing and trial dates presently scheduled are vacated. However, existing briefing

                                  17   schedules for motions remain unchanged. Motions must be renoticed for hearing before the judge

                                  18   to whom the case has been reassigned, but the renoticing of the hearing does not affect the prior

                                  19   briefing schedule. Other deadlines such as those for ADR compliance and discovery cutoff also

                                  20   remain unchanged.

                                  21   Dated: August 15, 2024

                                  22

                                  23
                                                                                         Mark B. Busby
                                  24                                                     Clerk, United States District Court
                                  25

                                  26
                                  27

                                  28


File and source

File
gov.uscourts.cand.433897.13.0.pdf
Size
29,842 bytes
SHA-256
2fb79beac5443238535282372125c55e5139cd66f23e8c899caeadda9eef3ddc
Our copy
gov.uscourts.cand.433897.13.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top