Global Comminity Monitor, et al v. Mammoth Pacific, LP et al

Filing 117

ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 4/24/18. The Court hereby modifies its sanctions as follows: To the extent sanctions were imposed for violating the Court's page limitations, that order is VACATED;The imposition of sanc tions based on Defendants' frivolous filings and use of footnotes is AFFIRMED; The amount of the sanctions is therefore reduced from $1500 to $750; and The Clerk of the Court is directed to disburse $750 from the $1500 collected on 1/30/2017, to Holland and Hart LLP. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15

GLOBAL COMMUNITY MONITOR, a
California nonprofit corporation;
LABORERS’ INTERNATIONAL UNION
OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL UNION
NO. 783, an organized labor union;
RANDAL SIPES, JR., an individual;
and RUSSEL COVINGTON, an
individual,

18
19
20
21

ORDER

Plaintiffs,

16
17

No. 2:14-cv-01612-MCE-KJN

v.
MAMMOTH PACIFIC, L.P., a California
Limited Partnership; ORMAT NEVADA,
INC., a Delaware Corporation; ORMAT
TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Delaware
Corporation; and DOES I–X, inclusive,
Defendants.

22
23

This case is here on remand after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed in

24

part this Court’s order imposing sanctions in the amount of $1500 on Defendants’

25

counsel. The appellate court determined that: (1) “to the extent the district court based

26

its decision to sanction defendants on the grounds that their filings were frivolous and

27

violated the court’s warning not to use footnotes to avoid page limits, [this Court] did not

28

abuse its discretion”; but (2) “to the extent the district court based its decision on the
1

1

ground that the defendants’ filings exceeded the page limits set by the Pretrial

2

Scheduling Order, it was clearly erroneous.” ECF No. 115 at 1. That court thus

3

remanded for this Court to make “a determination of whether sanctions are appropriate

4

in light of the correct page limits.” Id. at 2. Having reviewed the decision of the appellate

5

court and the record in its entirety, the Court hereby modifies its sanctions order as

6

follows:

7
8
9
10

1. To the extent sanctions were imposed for violating the Court’s page
limitations, that order is VACATED;
2. The imposition of sanctions based on Defendants’ frivolous filings and use of
footnotes is AFFIRMED;

11

3. The amount of the sanctions is therefore reduced from $1500 to $750; and

12

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to disburse $750 from the $1500 collected

13
14
15

on January 30, 2017, to Holland and Hart LLP.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 24, 2018

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