Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 2, 2025

Smith v. Rack Room Shoes, Inc.

Judge
Lin
Docket
3:24-cv-06709
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Demetrius Smith v. Rack Room Shoes, Judge Lin ordered Rack Room Shoes to correct or explain a disputed case citation by October 9, 2025.

Who this affects

Rack Room Shoes, Inc., which was ordered to correct or explain the citation in its opposition brief.

What happened

In Demetrius Smith, et al. v. Rack Room Shoes, Inc., Rack Room Shoes cited a Ninth Circuit case in opposing the plaintiffs’ motion to amend.

The court could not locate the cited case or the quoted passage. It ordered Rack Room Shoes to provide a corrected citation and explain how the case came to be cited in its brief by October 9, 2025.

Judge Rita F. Lin issued the order on October 2, 2025. The opinion does not decide the plaintiffs’ motion to amend.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Smith v. Rack Room Shoes, Inc. · No. 3:24-cv-06709
Judge
Lin
Date
Oct. 2, 2025

Background

In its opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion to amend, Rack Room Shoes cited In re W. Coast Lamps, 755 F.3d 1142, 1147 (9th Cir. 2014), and quoted that case. The court stated that it was unable to locate the cited case or the relevant quotation.

Order

The court ordered Rack Room Shoes to provide a corrected citation and otherwise explain how the case came to be cited in its brief. The deadline was October 9, 2025.

What the Order Did Not Decide

The order does not state how the court would rule on the plaintiffs’ motion to amend or resolve any other issue in the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.