Andre-Gollihar v. County of San Joaquin

Full title: SANDRA ANDRE-GOLLIHAR, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, et…

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Jun 10, 2013

2:09-cv-3313 TLN KJN PS (E.D. Cal. Jun. 10, 2013)

Opinion

SANDRA ANDRE-GOLLIHAR, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, et al., Defendants. No. 2:09-cv-3313 TLN KJN PS United States District Court, E.D. California. June 10, 2013

          ORDER

          KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

         On January 9, 2013, plaintiffs' former counsel, Francis Shehadeh, was terminated as counsel of record by the district judge after Mr. Shehadeh failed to comply with, and respond to, the court's orders. (ECF No. 75.) At that time, plaintiffs were granted 60 days to obtain new counsel and defendants were directed to refrain from filing any dispositive motions during that time period. (Id.) On April 30, 2013, plaintiffs were granted another extension to obtain counsel. (ECF No. 80.) However, plaintiffs subsequently indicated that efforts to obtain counsel had been unsuccessful, because they were unable to obtain their files and records from plaintiffs' former counsel, as well as certain reports and documents concerning the underlying incident(s) from defendants, which potential new counsel apparently represented they required to determine whether they could represent plaintiffs. (ECF No. 83.) Plaintiffs also filed several "requests" for the court to rule on the discoverability of these files and records. (ECF No. 81, 82.)

         Consequently, on June 7, 2013, the action was referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21) for appropriate pretrial proceedings. (ECF No. 84.)

         In light of the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. A status conference in this matter is set for Thursday July 25, 2013, at 10:00 a.m., in courtroom number 25 before the undersigned.

         2. No later than July 18, 2013, the parties shall file status reports, preferably a joint status report, addressing the specific topics outlined in the court's previous April 7, 2010 order setting status conference. (See ECF No. 7 at 2-3.) The parties shall also be prepared to discuss plaintiffs' above-mentioned requests. (ECF Nos. 81, 82.)

         3. Failure to timely file a status report may result in sanctions, including a potential recommendation that this case be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or other appropriate sanctions.

         4. Any routine motion practice in this matter continues to be stayed pending the status conference.

         5. The Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of the court's previous April 7, 2010 order setting status conference on plaintiffs along with this order.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.