From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gutierrez v. Target Corp.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 22, 2023
1:21-cv-01832-JLT-CDB (E.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2023)

Opinion

1:21-cv-01832-JLT-CDB

11-22-2023

TAMMY GUTIERREZ, Plaintiff, v. TARGET CORPORATION, Defendant.


ORDER DISCHARGING SANCTIONS ORDER AND REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO PAY SANCTIONS (DOC. 54) TEN DAY DEADLINE ORDER TO FILE DISPOSITIONAL DOCUMENTS SIX DAY DEADLINE

On April 27, 2021, Plaintiff Tammy Gutierrez (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Kern. (Doc. 1). Defendant removed the action to this Court on December 29, 2021. Id.

Following Plaintiffs filing of a Notice of Settlement on October 16, 2023 (Doc. 49), the Court vacated all case management dates and directed the parties to file dispositional documents within 30 days (e.g., no later than November 16, 2023), or, on or before that date, show cause to extend the time for filing dispositional documents. (Doc. 51). The day following the deadline (November 17, 2023), as the parties failed to timely comply with the Court's order, the Court ordered the parties to show cause why sanctions, including financial sanctions and/or dismissal, should not be imposed for the parties' failure to comply with Court orders and Local Rules and for their failure to prosecute this action. (Doc. 52). Once again, Plaintiff failed to timely file a response to the Court's order.

On November 20, 2023, the Court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to pay sanctions of $100 per day until either dispositional documents were filed or Plaintiff filed a declaration that is responsive to and complies with this Court's October 17 and November 17, 2023 orders. (Doc. 54). The Court found a daily sanction should be imposed to compel compliance with its earlier order. Id. The following day, Plaintiff filed a declaration responding to the Court's orders. (Doc. 55). In light of Plaintiff's prompt response to the order imposing sanctions, the Court perceives Plaintiff recognizes the importance of timely complying with this Court's orders and thus, shall discharge further sanctions and shall impose a $100 sanction based on the Court's order. (Doc. 54 at 3) (noting that Plaintiff's filing of the report on the date of the order's issuance will not relieve Plaintiff of the sanction imposed commencing on this date”).

Furthermore, although the parties have not sought additional time within which to comply with the Court's orders to file dispositional documents, based on the parties' filings (Docs. 53, 55), the Court finds good cause for a brief extension.

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff shall pay the Clerk of the Court $100.00 in sanctions no later than December 5, 2023. Plaintiff shall file proof of payment with the Court within three days after payment is made, and if such payment and proof of payment is not timely made, additional sanctions of $50.00 per day shall issue from December 5, 2023, until full payment is received, and notice is filed with the Court; and

2. The parties are directed to file dispositional documents no later than November 28, 2023.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Gutierrez v. Target Corp.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 22, 2023
1:21-cv-01832-JLT-CDB (E.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2023)
Case details for

Gutierrez v. Target Corp.

Case Details

Full title:TAMMY GUTIERREZ, Plaintiff, v. TARGET CORPORATION, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Nov 22, 2023

Citations

1:21-cv-01832-JLT-CDB (E.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2023)