Rosario Santillan et al v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. et al

Filing 61

MINUTES (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Comply with Court Orders by Judge Kenly Kiya Kato. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing why this action should not be dismissed and/or sanctions imposed for failure to prosecute and/or comply with court orders. Plaintiffs shall have up to and including July 26, 2024 to respond to this Order. (See document for further information). (aco)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Case No. EDCV 22-1951-KK-SHKx Date: July 22, 2024 Title: Rosario Santillan, et al. v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., et al. Present: The Honorable KENLY KIYA KATO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Noe Ponce Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s): Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s): None Present None Present Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute and Comply with Court Orders On November 3, 2022, plaintiffs Rosario Santillan and Miguel Santillan Gonzalez (“Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint against American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (“Defendant”). ECF Docket No. (“Dkt.”) 1. On December 13, 2023, Defendant filed an Answer. Dkt. 11. On August 9, 2023, the Court issued an Order Granting Stipulation to Continue Schedule of Pretrial and Trial Dates and ordered the parties to participate in a private mediation under the mandatory Court-Directed Alternative Dispute Resolution Program no later than July 5, 2024. Dkt. 43. On November 22, 2023, the Court issued a Reassignment Order stating “[d]ates for previously scheduled ADR conferences shall remain in effect.” Dkt. 46 at 2. On April 23, 2024, the Court issued an Order stating it has “updated its procedures in civil cases, including the recommended timelines in the Court’s Schedule of Pretrial Dates form and the requirements and deadlines for filing pretrial documents.” Dkt. 52. Specifically, the Court’s Civil Trial Scheduling Order advised Plaintiffs to file a Joint Report regarding the outcome of settlement discussions, the likelihood of possible further discussions, and any help the Court may provide with regard to settlement negotiations “not later than seven (7) days after the settlement conference.” Civil Trial Scheduling Order at 3 (emphasis in original). Page 1 of 2 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk NP Plaintiffs were, therefore, required to file the Joint Report no later than July 12, 2024. However, the Court has not received a Joint Report. Plaintiffs are therefore in violation of the Court’s Civil Trial Scheduling Order. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), the Court may dismiss this action with prejudice for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court order. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). Before dismissing this action, the Court will afford Plaintiffs an opportunity to explain their failure to file the Joint Report as directed by the Court’s Civil Trial Scheduling Order. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing why this action should not be dismissed and/or sanctions imposed for failure to prosecute and/or comply with court orders. Plaintiffs shall have up to and including July 26, 2024 to respond to this Order. Plaintiffs are expressly warned that failure to timely file a response to this Order will result in this action being dismissed without prejudice and/or other sanctions, including monetary sanctions, for failure to prosecute and comply with Court orders. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). IT IS SO ORDERED. Page 2 of 2 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk NP

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?