Opinion
3:21-cv-05732-LK
06-21-2023
JAMES MATHEWS, Plaintiff, v. KARCHER NORTH AMERICA, INC., Defendant.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Lauren King United States District Judge
This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. Under the current scheduling order, the parties were required to file proposed jury instructions, an LCR 16.1 agreed pretrial order, and completed exhibit list no later than June 20, 2023. Dkt. No. 34 at 2. That date has come and gone, and the parties have not filed anything. Missing deadlines especially deadlines on the eve of trial not only violates the Court's scheduling order but also interferes with Court administration. Court staff must, for example, issue juror summonses sufficiently in advance of trial to ensure that the parties will have a jury to decide their case. Here, however, the parties' inability to adhere to the Court's scheduling order has precluded the timely accomplishment of that costly administrative task. And although the Court encourages settlement efforts, “the possibility of settlement does not excuse parties from deadlines.” Alcazar v. Farmer Boys Food, Inc., No. 2:20-CV-04342-RGK-KS, 2021 WL 4583650, at *3 n.3 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2021); see also Wienco, Inc. v. Katahn Assocs., Inc., 965 F.2d 565, 567 (7th Cir. 1992) (“[T]here is no reason that settlement negotiations prevent a party from complying with scheduled court deadlines.”).
The parties are accordingly ORDERED to show cause no later than June 23, 2023 why sanctions should not issue for their failure to comply with the Court's scheduling order. See LCR 11(c); Webb v. Ackerman, No. CV-13-9112-PLA, 2017 WL 427142, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2017). If the parties file their proposed jury instructions, pretrial order, and exhibit list or otherwise dispose of this case by June 23, 2023, the Court will discharge this order to show cause. Should the parties fail to timely respond to this Order, the Court will impose additional sanctions.