Rosedale Union School District v. J.F., et al.

Filing 52

ORDER to the PARTIES to SHOW CAUSE Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed for Their Failure to Comply with the Court's Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 5/10/2017. Show Cause Response due by 5/19/2017. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

ROSEDALE UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT, )
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
J.F., a minor, by and through BRADLEY
)
FEIGE and JENNIFER FEIGE,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
)
AND RELATED CROSS ACTION
)
)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00147 JLT
ORDER TO THE PARTIES TO SHOW CAUSE
WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED
FOR THEIR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE
COURT’S ORDERS

19
20

On September 19, 2016, the parties notified the Court that the matter had settled. (Doc. 32)

21

The settlement was contingent upon the completion of an IEE and the IEP reviewing it. Id. Thus, the

22

Court ordered the dismissal documents to be filed by December 2, 2016, when these actions were to be

23

completed. Id.

24

On December 2, 2016, the Court granted in part the stipulation to extend the deadline to

25

dismiss the action to March 24, 2016. (Doc. 44) The stipulation indicated that the assessment to be

26

completed by the specialist was not yet finished and Rosedale had not yet made the payment required

27

by the settlement. (Doc. 42) In the order, the Court required,

28

In the event counsel determine they cannot complete the settlement by this deadline, no
later than March 17, 2016, they SHALL file a joint request for additional time. The
1

1

request SHALL set forth a comprehensive description of the impediments to dismissal
and an explanation why these impediments could not more quickly be overcome.

2
3

Doc. 44 at n. 1. Once again, on March 24, 2017, the Court granted the stipulation to extend the

4

deadline to April 28, 2017 to dismiss the action, this time because the Rosedale needed more time to

5

“effectuate payment for the vision therapy independent educational evaluation.” (Doc. 48) Despite

6

this, April 28, has come and gone and no dismissal papers have been filed. Therefore, the Court

7

ORDERS:

8
9
10
11

1.

No later than May 19, 2017, the parties SHALL show cause in writing why sanctions,

up to and including dismissal of this action, should not be imposed for their failure to comply with the
Court’s orders.
Failure to comply will result in the Court dismissing this action.

12
13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 10, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2