Mike Murphy's Enterprises, Inc. v. Fineline Industries, LLC

Filing 65

ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO SHOW CAUSE IN WRITING WHY MONETARY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT ISSUE FOR FAILURE TO FILE STATUS REPORT signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 2/23/2023. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the parties shall show cause in writing within two (2) days of the date of entry of this order why monetary sanctions should not issue for the failure to file a status report as ordered, in addition to providing a status report. Failure to comply with this order will result in the issuance of sanctions. (Gonzales, V)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MIKE MURPHY'S ENTERPRISES, INC.,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14

Case No. 1:16-cv-00784-JLT-SAB
ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO SHOW
CAUSE IN WRITING WHY MONETARY
SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT ISSUE FOR
FAILURE TO FILE STATUS REPORT

v.
FINELINE INDUSTRIES, LLC,

(ECF Nos. 60, 64)
Defendant.

15
16
17

On October 31, 2016, the Court granted Defendant’s motion to stay this case pending

18 resolution of Plaintiff’s parallel state court action. (ECF No. 26.) On November 2, 2016, the
19 Court ordered the parties to file a status report every ninety days until the stay is lifted and set the
20 deadline for the first status report as January 31, 2017. (ECF No. 27.) Since that date, the parties
21 have submitted approximately twenty-one status reports regarding the status of the parallel state
22 court action. On March 29, 2022, the Court issued an order after the parties failed to file a status
23 report. (ECF No. 60.) The order stated: “this is the fourth time it has been required to order the
24 parties to submit their regular status report after they failed to timely do so . . . [s]hould the
25 parties fail to timely submit their next status report, the Court will issue an order to show cause
26 why sanctions should not be issued for their failure to comply with this Court’s orders.” (ECF
27 No. 60 at 1-2.)
28

The most recent status report was filed on November 23, 2022. (ECF No 64.) The

1

1 parties did not indicate therein that a further status report was unnecessary. Therefore, the
2 parties’ next status report became due on February 21, 2023, but nothing was filed.
Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these

3

4 Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all
5 sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to
6 control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate,
7 including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir.
8 2000).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

9

1.

10

The parties shall show cause in writing within two (2) days of the date of entry

11

of this order why monetary sanctions should not issue for the failure to file a

12

status report as ordered, in addition to providing a status report; and
2.

13

Failure to comply with this order will result in the issuance of sanctions.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16 Dated:

February 23, 2023
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

2