Tehachapi Unified School District v. K.M. (a minor) et al

Filing 55

ORDER to the PARTIES to SHOW CAUSE Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed for Their Failure to Comply with the Court's Order to File Dismissal Documents, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 6/13/2019. Show Cause Response due within 14 days. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

K.M.,

Case No.: 1:17-cv-01431 LJO JLT

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

TEHACHAPI UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT, et al.,

ORDER TO THE PARTIES TO SHOW CAUSE
WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED
FOR THEIR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE
COURT’S ORDER TO FILE DISMISSAL
DOCUMENTS

15
Defendants.
16
_____________________________________
17
BRENDA MARKHAM,
18
Plaintiff,
19

Case No.: 1:15-cv-01835 LJO JLT
v.

20
21
22

TEHACHAPI UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT, et al.,
Defendants.
_____________________________________

23
BRENDA MARKHAM,
24
Plaintiff,
25

Case No.: 1:18-cv-00303 LJO JLT
v.

26
27
28

TEHACHAPI UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT, et al.,
Defendants.
TEHACHAPI UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT

1

Plaintiff,

2

v.

3

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01942 LJO JLT

K.M.,
Defendant.

4
5
6
7

The Court adopted the findings and recommendation to grant the petition for the minor’s

8

compromise. (Doc. 481) In doing so, the Court ordered the parties “file with the Court a stipulation for

9

dismissal of the action with prejudice, and lodge a separate order, pursuant to the schedule set forth in

10

the F&Rs.” Id. at 3. The findings and recommendation required this to occur within 45 days after the

11

Court adopted them. (Doc. 47 at 92) Despite the expiration of the 45-day period, the parties have

12

failed to comply. Therefore, the Court ORDERS:
1.

13

Within 14 days, the parties SHALL show cause in writing why sanctions should not

14

be imposed for their failure to comply with the Court’s order to file the stipulated dismissal and to

15

lodge a separate order. Alternatively, within 14 days, they may file/lodge the overdue documents.

16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED.

18

Dated:

June 13, 2019

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

In case number 1:15-cv-01835 LJO JLT, the docket number is 71. In case number 1:18-cv-00303 LJO JLT it is Doc. 24
and in case number 1:16-cv-01942 LJO JLT it is 54.
2
In case number 1:15-cv-01835 LJO JLT, the docket number is 69. In case number 1:18-cv-00303 LJO JLT it is Doc. 22
and in case number 1:16-cv-01942 LJO JLT it is 53.