United States District CourtFor the Northern District of California1
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 CourtFor the Northern District of CaliforniaIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
E-FILED 6/30/2005
ROBERT A. BROWN
Plaintiff,
v.
GOOGLE,INC.,
Defendant.
/
NO. CV 05-01779 RMW
CLERK’S NOTICE RE: FAILURE
TO FILE ELECTRONICALLY
AND/OR REGISTER AS AN E-
FILER
On 6/24/2005, counsel for defendant, Payrolling.com filed an Opposition Brief manually, on paper. This
case has been designated for electronic filing, pursuant to Local Rule 5-4 and General Order 45.
The above mentioned paper document has been filed and docketed. However, General Order 45 provides
at Section III that cases assigned to judges who participate in the e-filing program “shall be presumptively
designated” as e-filing cases. Therefore, counsel for defendant, Payrolling.com should submit the
Opposition Brief and the Amended Answer that was manually filed on 6/21/2005, in PDF format
within 10 days, as an attachment in an e-mail message directed to the judges chamber's "PDF" email box
listed at http://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov. (Click on the Judges button and follow the procedure listed there).
Do not e-file a document which has been previously filed on paper, as is the case with the above
mentioned filing. All subsequent papers should be e-filed.
Further, General Order 45 provides at Section IV (A) that "Each attorney of record is obligated to become
Case 5:05-cv-01779-RMW Document 34 Filed 06/24/2005 Page 1 of 2
Brown v. Google, Inc. et al
Doc. 34
Dockets.Justia.com
United States District CourtFor the Northern District of California1
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
an ECF User and be assigned a user ID and password for access to the system upon designation of the
action as being subject to ECF." Counsel in this case who ha