United States of America et al v. Somina, Inc., et al.

Filing 123

Order DISCHARGING Order to Show Cause and directing Relator/ Plaintiff to file Motion to Compel, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 3/25/2019. (Rosales, O.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ex rel. NICOLE O'NEILL, ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND DIRECTING RELATOR/PLAINTIFF TO FILE MOTION TO COMPEL Plaintiffs/Relator, 13 14 Case No. 1:15-cv-00433-DAD-EPG v. (ECF No.121) 15 16 SOMNIA, INC., et al., Defendants. 17 18 On January 25, 2019, the Court set a Telephonic Status Conference for March 12, 2019, 19 at 9:30 a.m. (ECF No. 112.) Relator/Plaintiff Nicolle O’Neill did not appear for the conference, 20 did not file a request for a continuance of the conference, and did not otherwise notify the Court 21 that she would not be able to attend the conference. (ECF No. 120.) The Court therefore issued 22 an order requiring Relator/Plaintiff to show cause why sanctions should not be issued for her 23 failure to attend a court conference. (ECF No. 121.) Relator/Plaintiff filed a response to the 24 order to show cause on March 15, 2019. (ECF No. 122.) 25 In the response, Relator/Plaintiff’s counsel explains that he did not appear at the court 26 conference because he had entered the conference on his office’s calendaring system on the 27 correct date but at the incorrect time of 10:00 a.m., rather than the correct time of 9:30 a.m., and 28 that his error was not detected by his paralegal. (ECF No. 122 at 4-5; see id. at 5-6.) Counsel 1 1 takes full responsibility for the error and resulting failure to appear at the March 5, 2019, 9:30 2 a.m. court conference. (Id. at 4-5.) Counsel also explains that he learned, at approximately 9:45 3 a.m. on March 5, 2019, that the conference was scheduled for 9:30 a.m. rather than 10:00 a.m. 4 He called the Court’s conference line to make a telephonic appearance, but the conference had 5 already ended. (Id. at 5.) 6 In light of counsel’s explanation, the Court DISCHARGES the order to show cause. 7 However, the Court cautions that it does not take lightly the failure of counsel to appear at a 8 court conference or hearing and DIRECTS counsel to take appropriate steps to ensure that his 9 office has in place procedures that ensure error-free calendaring. 10 The Court’s review of the joint status report, as well as Plaintiff’s response to the order to 11 show cause, demonstrates that Plaintiff has a ripe discovery dispute that requires a formal 12 motion and hearing. Rather than reset the status conference, the Court further DIRECTS 13 Relator/Plaintiff to proceed with the filing of a motion to compel and to contact the Court’s 14 courtroom deputy for a hearing date on the motion. The Court will discuss the need for a further 15 status conference at the hearing on the motion to compel. 16 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 25, 2019 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?