Reitz et al v. Progressive Direct Insurance Company et al

Filing 10

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 10/16/2014. Each party shall SHOW CAUSE, in writing and not later than 10/27/2014, why sanctions should not be imposed against party and/or party's counsel. If requested, a OSC Hearing will be set on 11/24/2014 at 9:00 AM prior to Status Conference. A Joint Status Report shall be filed no later than 14 days prior to Status Hearing. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8
9

MISTY DAWN REITZ, and
NICHOLAS IVEY,
Plaintiffs,

10
11
12
13
14
15

No. 2:14-cv-01614-GEB-EFB

v.
PROGRESSIVE DIRECT INSURANCE
COMPANY, an Ohio Corporation
registered to do business in
the State of California; and
Does I through CC, inclusive,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND
CONTINUING STATUS (PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE

Defendants.

16
17

The

July

9,

2014,

Order

Setting

Status

(Pretrial

18

Scheduling) Conference scheduled a status conference in this case

19

on October 24, 2014, and required the parties to file a joint

20

status report no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the

21

scheduling conference. The July 9, 2014 Order further required a

22

status report be filed regardless of whether a joint report could

23

be procured. No status report was filed as ordered.

24

Therefore, each party is Ordered to Show Cause (“OSC”)

25

in a writing to be filed no later than October 27, 2014, why

26

sanctions should not be imposed against the party and/or the

27

party’s counsel under Rule 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil

28

Procedure for failure to file a timely status report. The written
1

1

response

2

counsel is at fault, and whether a hearing is requested on the

3

OSC.1 If a hearing is requested, it will be held on November 24,

4

2014, at 9:00 a.m., just prior to the status conference, which is

5

rescheduled to that date and time. A status report shall be filed

6

no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the status conference.

7
8

shall

also

state

whether

the

party

or

the

party’s

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

October 16, 2014

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

“If the fault lies with the attorney, that is where the impact of
sanction should be lodged. If the fault lies with the clients, that is where
the impact of the sanction should be lodged.” In re Sanction of Baker, 744
F.2d 1438, 1442 (10th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1014 (1985).
Sometimes the faults of attorneys, and their consequences, are visited upon
clients. Myers v. Shekter (In re Hill), 775 F.2d 1385, 1387 (9th Cir. 1985).

2