Osegueda et al v. Stanislaus County Public Safety Center et al

Filing 67

ORDER requiring Counsel for Plaintiff to appear 4/19/2021 at 09:30 AM to SHOW CAUSE why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to obey a court order signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 4/5/2021. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

ARMANDO OSEGUEDA, et al.,

8
9
10
11
12
13

Plaintiffs,
v.
STANISLAUS COUNTY PUBLIC
SAFETY CENTER, et al.,

Case No. 1:16-cv-01218-NONE-BAM
ORDER REQUIRING COUNSEL FOR
PLAINTIFF TO APPEAR APRIL 19, 2021
TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS
SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR FAILURE
TO OBEY A COURT ORDER

Defendants.
Plaintiffs Armando Osegueda and Robert Palomino filed this action on August 16, 2016.

14

(Doc. 1.) On February 5, 2017, a Second Amended Complaint was filed adding David Lomeli

15

and Jairo Hernandez as Plaintiffs. (Doc. 22.) On January 29, 2019, the Court approved the

16

parties’ stipulation to stay this matter pending resolution of the state criminal proceedings against

17

Plaintiffs. (Doc. 50.) The Court further directed Plaintiffs to file a written status report every

18

ninety (90) days notifying the Court of the status of the criminal matter. (Id.)

19

On December 27, 2019, after no status reports had been filed, the Court issued an Order to

20

Show Cause why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to comply with an order of the

21

Court. (Doc. 53.) Plaintiffs were required to file either a written response or the required status

22

report by January 10, 2020. (Id.) Plaintiffs did not file a written response or status report as

23

required by the Court’s December 27, 2019 order. Accordingly, on January 29, 2020, the Court

24

ordered Plaintiffs’ counsel Amber Hope Gordon to personally appear before the Court on

25

February 12, 2020, to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute

26

and failure to comply with the Court’s orders. (Doc. 56.) Counsel was permitted to comply with

27

the Court’s January 29, 2020 Order to Show Cause by filing the required status report by

28

February 10, 2020. (Id.)
1

1

On January 29, 2020, Plaintiffs filed the required status report. (Doc. 57.) The Court

2

accordingly discharged the Orders to Show Cause issued December 27, 2019, and January 29,

3

2020. (Doc. 58.) However, counsel was reminded of Plaintiffs’ ongoing obligation to file a

4

written status report every ninety (90) days notifying the Court of the status of the criminal

5

matter. (Id.) Counsel was further cautioned that any future failure to comply with an order of the

6

Court will result in the imposition of sanctions. (Id.)

7

On May 4, 2020, after Plaintiffs again failed to file a status report, the Court issued

8

another Order to Show Cause why sanctions should not be imposed. (Doc. 60.) Plaintiffs were

9

ordered to respond in writing within fourteen (14) days and were permitted to comply with the

10

Order to Show Cause by filing the required status report. (Id.) On May 22, 2020, Plaintiffs filed

11

the required status report. (Doc. 61.) The Court accordingly discharged the Order to Show Cause

12

issued May 4, 2020. (Doc. 62.) However, the Court noted that Plaintiffs’ May 22, 2020 status

13

report was filed well after the deadline for a response to the Order to Show Cause. (Id.) Counsel

14

was again reminded of the obligation to file status reports every ninety (90) days and was

15

additionally warned that future failures to comply with the Court’s orders would result in the

16

imposition of sanctions against counsel. (Id.)

17

On August 26, 2020, after Plaintiffs yet again failed to file a status report, the Court

18

ordered Plaintiffs’ counsel Amber Hope Gordon to personally appear via Zoom before the Court

19

on September 10, 2020, to show cause why sanctions, including monetary sanctions and/or

20

dismissal of this action, should not be imposed against her for failure to comply with an order of

21

the Court. (Doc. 63.)

22

On August 27, 2020, Plaintiffs filed a status report indicating that Messrs. Osegueda and

23

Palomino’s criminal cases were ongoing. (Doc. 64.) Plaintiffs’ counsel further provided a

24

declaration explaining that her failure to file a timely status report was due to the death of her

25

father. (Doc. 64-1.) The Court accordingly discharged the Order to Appear and Show Cause

26

issued on August 26, 2020. (Doc. 65.) However, the Court noted that Plaintiffs’ status reports

27

have been tardy on multiple occasions and several orders to show cause have issued in order to

28

secure Plaintiffs’ compliance with applicable deadlines. The Court indicated that counsel’s
2

1

delays have caused the Court to unnecessarily expend its resources to gain counsel’s compliance

2

with orders. (Id.) Additionally, the Court strongly cautioned counsel against future failures to

3

comply with the Court’s orders because future failures will likely result in the imposition of

4

sanctions. (Id.)
On November 23, 2020, Plaintiffs’ filed a status report indicating that Messrs. Osegueda

5
6

and Palomino’s criminal cases were ongoing. (Doc. 66.) The status report was dated January 22,

7

2020. (Id. at 2.)

8

More than ninety days has elapsed since the last submission of a status report on

9

November 23, 2020, and Plaintiffs have once again failed to file a timely written status report.
Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules

10
11

or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all

12

sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to

13

control its docket and may impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal of the action.

14

Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000).
Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ counsel, Amber Hope Gordon, is HEREBY ORDERED to appear

15
16

before the undersigned on April 19, 2021, at 9:30 AM to show cause why sanctions, including

17

monetary sanctions and/or dismissal of this action, should not be imposed against her for failure

18

to comply with an order of the Court. In light of evolving coronavirus protocols, Ms. Gordon

19

shall appear remotely via Zoom. Ms. Gordon shall contact Courtroom Deputy, Esther Valdez, at

20

[phone] or [e-mail] for the video and dial-in information.

21

Ms. Gordon may submit a written response to this order to show cause on or before April

22

9, 2021. Notwithstanding any written response, Ms. Gordon will be required to personally appear

23

before the Court via Zoom on April 19, 2021.

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28
3

1

Failure to file a written response or failure to appear before the Court on April 19,

2

2021, will result in the imposition of sanctions, including monetary sanctions and/or a

3

recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply

4

with the Court’s orders. Counsel is cautioned that this Court is strongly considering

5

recommending dismissal of this action for counsel’s continuous failure to abide by Court

6

orders.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8
9

Dated:

/s/ Barbara

April 5, 2021

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4