Amerson v. Amazon.com Services, LLC

Filing 12

ORDER DISCHARGING 9 April 18, 2024, Order to Show Cause and RESETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE, signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker on 4/22/2024. Scheduling Conference reset for 5/1/2024 at 09:00 AM in Bakersfield (CDB) before Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ASHLEY ANN AMERSON,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15

Case No. 1:24-cv-00100-JLT-CDB
ORDER DISCHARGING APRIL 18, 2024,
ORDER TO SHOW AND RESETTING
SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

v.
AMAZON.COM SERVICES, LLC,

(Doc. 9)

Defendant.

16
17

On December 7, 2023, Plaintiff Ashley Ann Amerson (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint

18 against Defendant Amazon.com, Services, LLC. (“Defendant”) in Kern County Superior Court.
19 (Doc. 1). On January 22, 2024, Defendant removed the action to this Court. Id.
20

On April 18, 2024, the Court convened for a scheduling conference via Zoom. (Doc. 8).

21 Counsel for Plaintiff failed to appear at the scheduling conference and was unresponsive to the
22 efforts of the undersigned’s courtroom deputy clerk to inquire via email about Counsel’s absence.
23 The Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing within three days why she should not be
24 sanctioned for failing to appear at the scheduling conference. (Doc. 9). The Court also ordered
25 Plaintiff by that same deadline to coordinate with Defendant and file a joint report identifying
26 dates for a re-set scheduling conference. Id.
27

Thereafter, Counsel for Plaintiff filed a declaration in response to the Court’s order to show

28 cause. (Doc. 10). Counsel for Plaintiff attests he mis-calendared the scheduling conference. Id.
1

1 at 2. On April 22, 2024, the parties filed a joint status report and provided mutually available
2 dates for a reset scheduling conference. (Doc. 11).
3

To determine whether neglect is excusable, a court must consider four factors: “(1) the

4 danger of prejudice to the opposing party; (2) the length of the delay and its potential impact on
5 the proceedings; (3) the reason for the delay; and (4) whether the movant acted in good faith.” In
6 re Veritas Software Corp. Sec. Litig., 496 F.3d 962, 973 (9th Cir. 2007). Based on its evaluation
7 of the factors in this case, the Court finds Counsel for Plaintiff’s representations and timely
8 response demonstrate that the failure to follow the Court’s orders constituted excusable neglect.
9 Moreover, the parties have followed the Court’s order and provided mutually available dates for
10 a reset scheduling conference. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
11

1. The April 18, 2024, order to show cause is DISCHARGED; and

12

2. An initial scheduling conference is set for May 1, 2024, at 9:00 AM, in Bakersfield

13

(CDB) before Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker. The parties shall file a

14

renewed joint scheduling report at least three (3) days before the scheduling

15

conference.

16 IT IS SO ORDERED.
17

Dated:

April 22, 2024

___________________

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2