Opinion
2:12-cv-01381-GEB-GGH
02-07-2013
E CLAMPUS VITUS, Plaintiff, v. DAVID L. STEINER, THOMAS PEAK, JOHN MOORE, KARL DODGE, JOSEPH ZUMWALT CHAPTER 169 E CLAMPUS VITUS, and DOES 1 through 50, Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND CONTINUING STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE
An Order to Show Cause ("OSC") was filed on January 23, 2013, directing Plaintiff to explain in a writing to be filed no later than January 28, 2013, why sanctions should not be imposed against it and/or its counsel for failure to participate in the preparation and timely filing of a joint status report. (ECF No. 21.) Because of this failure, a previously scheduled Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference was continued to February 11, 2013, and the parties were required to file a joint status report no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the rescheduled Status Conference. (Id.)
Plaintiff's counsel did not respond to the January 23, 2013 OSC. Further, Plaintiff again failed to participate in filing a timely joint status report. However, Defendants indicate in their separately filed status report as follows: "The undersigned contacted plaintiff's counsel twice last week regarding the preparation of this report. He replied on Saturday stating that he planned to withdraw from the case for health reasons." (Defs.' Status Report 1:18-20, ECF NO. 22.)
Therefore, Plaintiff is Ordered to Show Cause ("OSC") in a writing to be filed no later than February 11, 2013, why it and/or its counsel should not be sanctioned six hundred dollars ($600.00) for twice failing to participate in filing a timely joint status report and failing to respond to the January 23, 2013 OSC. The written response shall state whether Plaintiff or its counsel is at fault, and whether a hearing is requested on the OSC. If a hearing is requested, it will be held on March 4, 2013, at 9:00 a.m., just prior to the Status Conference, which is rescheduled to that date and time. A joint status report shall be filed no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the Status Conference.
Further, since the Court questions whether lesser sanctions sufficiently motivate the Plaintiff to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("Rules") and this Court's orders, Plaintiff is warned that the continued failure to comply with the Rules and/or this Court's orders could result in this action being dismissed with prejudice under Rule 41(b) and judgment entered in favor of Defendants.
_______________
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
Senior United States District Judge