Opinion
No C 06-3050 VRW, Related to case no C-04-1249.
September 25, 2007
ORDER
On September 6, 2007, the court entered an order denying plaintiff's motion for miscellaneous relief. Doc #127. Therein, the court noted that the settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Chen had been reported as unsuccessful. Id. Accordingly, the court ordered the parties to appear for a case management conference ("CMC"), which is now scheduled for October 11, 2007 at 3:30pm. Id; Doc #128. The court also instructed plaintiff that he was not to file any further papers in this action prior to the CMC without first obtaining leave of court. Doc #127.
On September 21, 2007, plaintiff filed a request for leave to file three categories of documents prior to the CMC. Doc #129. Plaintiff lists his requested filings as follows:
1. Applications/stipulations foreseen in the Court's case management order * * *;
2. A request for telephonic appearance at the CMC;
3. A letter to Judge Chen (the settlement Judge) requesting official confirmation of the procedural clarifications and recommendations provided by him after the settlement conference failed, and which were the basis for the miscellaneous application filed by plaintiff after the settlement conference, * * *
Doc #129. Plaintiff's request is DENIED.
Regarding plaintiff's first request, plaintiff fails to specify what "applications/stipulations" he seeks to file. Second, regarding plaintiff's request for telephonic appearance at the CMC, plaintiff fails to establish that he is unable to appear in person. Plaintiff resides in this district and filed his action in this court. Accordingly, the court finds no grounds to excuse plaintiff from attending court proceedings in person. Third, regarding plaintiff's request for a letter of clarification to Judge Chen, plaintiff fails to establish that the issues relating to his proposed letter must be resolved prior to the CMC. The court has already given plaintiff leave to file a case management statement. Plaintiff is free to report on the status of the case, including proceedings before Judge Chen, in his statement, and the court will address any issues that it deems necessary at the CMC.
Finally, the court reminds plaintiff of its June 22, 2005 order warning that plaintiff will be sanctioned $1000 per page for any frivolous motions or other filings worthy of FRCP 11 sanctions. See doc #163 in 04-1249 VRW.
IT IS SO ORDERED.