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)
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?