From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Foust v. Experian Info. Sols.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jul 23, 2024
5:24-cv-00771-SSS-SPx (C.D. Cal. Jul. 23, 2024)

Opinion

5:24-cv-00771-SSS-SPx

07-23-2024

Michael Foust v. Experian Information Solutions, et al.


THE HONORABLE SUNSHINE S. SYKES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) Order to Show Cause Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed Against Plaintiff and Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC's Counsel for Failure to File a Rule 26(f) Report

On June 11, 2024, the Court issued an order setting the Scheduling Conference for August 2, 2024. [Dkt. 19]. Pursuant to Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties are to file their Joint Rule 26(f) Report not later than 14 days before the Scheduling Conference. As of today's date, the parties have not filed a Joint Rule 26(f) Report.

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS counsel for Plaintiff, Matthew E. Faler, and counsel for Defendant Equifax Information Services, LLC's, Thomas P. Quinn, Jr., to show cause why they should not each be sanctioned in the amount of $250 for their failure to file a timely Joint Rule 26(f) Report. Counsel are DIRECTED to respond in writing to this Order to Show Cause by Monday, July 29, 2024 at 12:00 noon. Counsel's failure to respond-or counsel's filing of an inadequate response-may result in the imposition of additional sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Foust v. Experian Info. Sols.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jul 23, 2024
5:24-cv-00771-SSS-SPx (C.D. Cal. Jul. 23, 2024)
Case details for

Foust v. Experian Info. Sols.

Case Details

Full title:Michael Foust v. Experian Information Solutions, et al.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jul 23, 2024

Citations

5:24-cv-00771-SSS-SPx (C.D. Cal. Jul. 23, 2024)