Curtis v. Coca-Cola Enterprises Bottling Companies

Filing 68

ORDER Adopting 64 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and Denying 47 Motion for Sanctions, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 1/12/2015. (Gaumnitz, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 MAURICE J. CURTIS,
11
12

Plaintiff,
vs.

13 BCI COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES
BOTTLING COMPANIES,
14
Defendants.
15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.:1:13-cv-1939 AWI-BAM
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
(ECF No. 64)

16
17

On November 7, 2014, Defendant BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Los Angeles

18 (“Defendant”) filed a motion for civil contempt sanctions and an application for an order to show
19 cause why third-party witness Mario Valdez (“Mr. Valdez”) should not be held in civil contempt for
20 failure to appear at his October 21, 2014 deposition pursuant to subpoena. The matter was referred to
21 United States Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local
22 Rule 302.
23

On November 25, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued an Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) why

24 Mr. Valdez should not be held in civil contempt for failing to comply with a Court order to appear at
25 his deposition. (Doc. 52). A hearing regarding the OSC was held on December 19, 2014 at 9:00 am.
26 Non-party, Mario Valdez, appeared in person.
27
28

1

1

On December 22, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that the

2 motion for civil contempt sanctions be DENIED. (ECF No. 64.) The Findings and Recommendations
3 were served on all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fifteen (15)
4 days of the date of service.

To date, no party has filed objections to the findings and

5 recommendations.
6

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de

7 novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and
8 Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.
9

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

10
11

1.

The Findings and Recommendations issued December 22, 2014, are adopted in

full.

12
13 IT IS SO ORDERED.

14 Dated: January 12, 2015
15

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2