From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Madril v. Target Corp.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Oct 4, 2022
5:22-cv-01082-SSS-KKx (C.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2022)

Opinion

5:22-cv-01082-SSS-KKx

10-04-2022

Robert Madril v. Target Corporation


Present: 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's and Defendant's Counsel for Failure to File a Rule 26(f) Report

On July 18, 2022, the Court issued an order setting the Scheduling Conference for October 14, 2022 [Dkt. 13]. 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, Grant Joseph Savoy and Shoham J. Solouki, and counsel for Defendant, Irene Vera Fitzgerald; Caroline Mary Lutz; and Vanessa Marie Cohn, 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 Tuesday, October 11, 2022, 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

Madril v. Target Corp.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Oct 4, 2022
5:22-cv-01082-SSS-KKx (C.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2022)
Case details for

Madril v. Target Corp.

Case Details

Full title:Robert Madril v. Target Corporation

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Oct 4, 2022

Citations

5:22-cv-01082-SSS-KKx (C.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2022)