Audigier Brand Management Group LLC v. Rhita Perez et al

Filing 72

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Frederick F. Mumm. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 9/28/2017. (see attached) Based on the foregoing, Defendant Kraif is hereby ordered to show cause, in writing and within ten (10) days of the date of this order, why his answer should not be stricken and his default entered for his failure to comply with the Court's order requiring him to appear for a further deposition. IT IS SO ORDERED. (jm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV 15-7803 DDP (FFMx)

Title

AUDIGIER BRAND MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC v. RHITA PEREZ, et al.

Present: The Honorable

Date

September 18, 2017

Frederick F. Mumm, United States Magistrate Judge

James Munoz

N/A

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

None present

None present

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Before this Court is Plaintiff’s ex parte application (the “ex parte application”) to
compel further discovery responses from Defendant Serge Kraif (“Defendant Kraif”).
(Dkt. 69.) The Court notes that the District Judge vacated all previously scheduled dates
on September 15, 2017. Therefore, the need to file this discovery motion on an ex parte
basis no longer exists. Thus, the Court denies the ex parte application without prejudice.
Nonetheless, given the assertion that Defendant Kraif has failed to comply with a prior
Court order, the Court issues this Order to Show Cause directed to Defendant Kraif.
On February 21, 2017, the Court ordered Defendant Kraif to produce bank
statements from all his bank accounts for the 2013 fiscal year. (See Dkt 48.) On April
21, 2017, Defendant Kraif produced redacted versions of the bank statements. (Dkt. 691, Decl. of Dustin A. Huffine (“Huffine Decl.”) at ¶ 10.)
On June 28, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for sanctions asserting, among other
things, that Defendant Kraif’s submission of redacted bank statements violated the
Court’s February 21, 2017, order. (Dkt. 55.) The Court held a hearing on the matter on
July 25, 2017. At the hearing, the Court ordered the parties to meet and confer regarding
a further deposition of Defendant Kraif. (Dkt. 60.) Furthermore, on August 1, 2017, the
Court ordered Defendant Kraif to appear at a deposition, within thirty days of the date of
CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV 15-7803 DDP (FFMx)

Date

September 18, 2017

Title

AUDIGIER BRAND MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC v. RHITA PEREZ, et al.

that order, so that Plaintiff could “solici[t] testimony relating to [Defendant Kraif’s bank
statements].” (Dkt. 61.)
On August 29, 2017, Defendant Kraif’s counsel informed Plaintiff’s counsel that
Defendant Kraif would not be attending the deposition (which had been scheduled for
August 31, 2017). (See Huffine Decl. at ¶ 16.) To date, it appears that Defendant Kraif
has still not made himself available for the limited deposition, despite the expiration of
the deadline contained in the Court’s August 1 order.
Based on the foregoing, Defendant Kraif is hereby ordered to show cause, in
writing and within ten (10) days of the date of this order, why his answer should not be
stricken and his default entered for his failure to comply with the Court’s order requiring
him to appear for a further deposition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

:
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

JM

Page 2 of 2