Watkins v. Investment Retrievers, Inc.

Filing 19

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 10/11/17 ORDERING that plaintiff's counsel is ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE by October 20, 2017 why counsel should not be sanctioned: (1) $250.00 for failing to appear personally on Octobe r 6, 2017; and (2) $250.00 for failing to meet and confer as required of counsel of record regarding the joint status report. The court defers the issuance of any orders to Mr. Mandabach or Ms. Drake pending receipt of Mr. Stieglitz's response to this order.(Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

REGINALD WATKINS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:17-cv-01348-KJM-CKD

v.

ORDER

INVESTMENT RETRIEVERS, INC.,

15

Defendant.

16
A status conference and hearing on defendant’s motion to dismiss was set for

17
18

October 6, 2017. See Aug. 30, 2017 Minute Order, ECF No. 11. Plaintiff’s attorney of record,

19

Jonathan Aaron Stieglitz, did not appear. Instead, Carl Mandabach, who is not an attorney of

20

record in this matter and did not sign plaintiff’s opposition brief, appeared for plaintiff.

21

At the hearing, defendant’s counsel explained Mr. Stieglitz has referred

22

communications regarding this matter to Rachel Drake of RC Law Group. Further, RC Law

23

Group, not Mr. Stieglitz, participated in the parties’ meet and confer discussions and joint status

24

report. No attorney from RC Law Group, including Ms. Drake, is an attorney of record in this

25

matter.

26

Local Rule 182(a)(1) permits only an attorney of record to participate in an action.

27

Accordingly, plaintiff’s counsel is ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE by October 20, 2017 why

28

counsel should not be sanctioned: (1) $250.00 for failing to appear personally on October 6, 2017;
1

1

and (2) $250.00 for failing to meet and confer as required of counsel of record regarding the joint

2

status report.

3
4
5
6

The court defers the issuance of any orders to Mr. Mandabach or Ms. Drake
pending receipt of Mr. Stieglitz’s response to this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 11, 2017.

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2