Rosalinda Lynd v. Closetmaid Corporation
MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) Order To Show Cause Why Defendant's Counsel Should Not Be Subject To Sanctions by Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato. Defendant's counsel is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why Defendant's counsel should not be subject to sanctions. Defendant's counsel must file a written response to this Order by May 4, 2017. (dts)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
EDCV 16-1111-JGB (KK)
Date: April 28, 2017
Title: Rosalinda Lynd v. Closetmaid Corporation
Present: The Honorable KENLY KIYA KATO, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s):
Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s):
Order To Show Cause Why Defendant’s Counsel Should Not Be Subject
On August 29, 2016, counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant appeared before United States
District Judge Jesus G. Bernal for a scheduling conference. Dkt. 19, Mins. of Scheduling
Conference. The parties selected, and Judge Bernal referred the parties to, a settlement
conference with United States Magistrate Judge Kenly Kiya Kato, to be completed by May 8,
2017. Dkt. 20.
On March 10, 2017, Judge Kato issued an Order Re: Settlement Conference stating:
No later than 4:00 p.m. five (5) court days prior [to the conference] each party
shall submit a Confidential Settlement Conference Statement directly to the
chambers of Magistrate Judge Kato . . . .
The failure of any party to timely submit a Confidential Settlement Conference
Statement in compliance with this Order, or otherwise comply strictly with this
Order, may result in the Settlement Conference being ordered off calendar and
sanctions being imposed.
Page 1 of 2
Initials of Deputy Clerk __
Dkt. 22, Order Re: Settlement Conference ¶¶ 6, 8. Judge Kato’s Courtroom Deputy coordinated
with the parties to secure a mutually agreeable date for the settlement conference, and the
settlement conference was scheduled for May 2, 2017. Id. Therefore, the parties’ Confidential
Settlement Conference Statements were due at 4:00 p.m. on April 25, 2017.
Defendant did not timely file a Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. Hence,
on April 26, 2017, Judge Kato’s Courtroom Deputy sent Defendant’s counsel an email
requesting Defendant’s counsel submit a Confidential Settlement Conference Statement.
Defendant’s counsel did not respond. Therefore, Judge Kato’s Courtroom Deputy called
Defendant’s counsel on the morning of April 27, 2017 to inquire whether Defendant still
intended to participate in the settlement conference. Later that afternoon, Defendant’s counsel
finally informed Judge Kato’s Courtroom Deputy Defendant would be submitting a Confidential
Settlement Conference Statement by 4:30 p.m. that afternoon. At 4:42 p.m., on April 27, 2017,
with only two court days left before the settlement conference, the Court received Defendant’s
Confidential Settlement Conference Statement.
DEFENDANT’S COUNSEL IS SUBJECT TO SANCTIONS
“[C]ourts may impose sanctions for the failure to obey court orders.” Air Separation,
Inc. v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, 45 F.3d 288, 291 (9th Cir. 1995). Even where a
violation of court orders occurs inadvertently, “a district court may levy sanctions pursuant to its
inherent power for ‘willful disobedience of a court order . . . .’” Evon v. Law Offices of Sidney
Mickell, 688 F.3d 1015, 1035 (9th Cir. 2012) (quoting Fink v. Gomez, 239 F.3d 989, 989 (9th Cir.
Here, Defendant’s counsel willfully violated the Court’s March 10, 2017 Order by failing
to timely submit a Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. See Dkt. 22, Order Re:
Settlement Conference ¶ 6. Further, Defendant’s counsel did not respond to the Court’s April
26, 2017 inquiry. Finally, as of this date, counsel has not provided any explanation or justification
for their failure to comply with the Court’s March 10, 2017 Order.
Accordingly, Defendant’s counsel is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why Defendant’s
counsel should not be subject to sanctions. Defendant’s counsel must file a written response to
this Order by May 4, 2017.
Page 2 of 2
Initials of Deputy Clerk __
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?