From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reyes v. Flores

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 1, 2022
1:16-cv-00586-CDB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2022)

Opinion

1:16-cv-00586-CDB (PC)

11-01-2022

ABEL P. REYES, Plaintiff, v. M. FLORES, Defendant.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR A FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE COURT WITHIN 30 DAYS WHETHER A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WOULD BE PRODUCTIVE

On September 30, 2022, the previously assigned magistrate judge issued an Order directing the parties, in relevant part, to notify the Court in writing, within 30 days, whether a settlement conference would be productive in this matter. (Doc. 151.) More than 30 days have now passed, and no party has advised the Court as ordered.

The Local Rules, corresponding with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, provide, “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.” See Local Rule 110.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the parties, both of whom are represented by counsel, to show cause in a jointly-filed writing within 7 days of the date of this Order why sanctions should not be imposed for the parties' failure to comply with the September 30, 2022, order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Reyes v. Flores

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 1, 2022
1:16-cv-00586-CDB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2022)
Case details for

Reyes v. Flores

Case Details

Full title:ABEL P. REYES, Plaintiff, v. M. FLORES, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Nov 1, 2022

Citations

1:16-cv-00586-CDB (PC) (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2022)