Mendez v. California Forensic Medical Group, Inc.

Filing 36

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; Hearing set for 9/22/2015 10:00 AM. Signed by Judge Nandor J. Vadas on 8/25/2015. (njvlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/25/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 EUREKA DIVISION 7 8 INES MENDEZ, Case No. 14-cv-03756-NJV Plaintiff, 9 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 CALIFORNIA FORENSIC MEDICAL GROUP, INC., et al., Defendants. 13 14 This matter came on for hearing on August 25, 2015. The purpose of the hearing was to 15 inform Plaintiff that he was no longer represented in this case as his counsel was no longer an 16 active member of the State bar of California and was suspended from this court’s bar. The court 17 planned to inquire of Plaintiff whether he intended to procure new counsel or proceed pro se. To 18 that end, the court ordered Plaintiff to appear in person for the August 25, 2015 hearing and served 19 copies of that order on Plaintiff at his two last known addresses. Plaintiff did not appear for the 20 hearing. Several minutes after the hearing began, Mr. Davies, the aforementioned suspended 21 attorney, appeared and with paperwork in hand explained that he had, just that very morning, been 22 reinstated to the State Bar of California and that he had spoken with Plaintiff about the hearing. 23 However, Mr. Davies was unable to account for Plaintiff’s failure to appear. The court instructed 24 Mr. Davies that he would need to reapply for active status with the bar of this court before he 25 could proceed as counsel in this case. 26 The court has now, on two occasions, ordered Plaintiff to attend hearings and Plaintiff has 27 now, on two occasions, ignored the orders of this court. Considering the lack of any timely 28 response to Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment, counsel’s apparent indifference to his 1 bar status, and Plaintiff’s blatant disregard of this court’s orders to appear, it is ORDERED that 2 Plaintiff INES MENDEZ shall appear at the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, 3140 3 Boeing Avenue, McKinleyville, CA 95519 at 10:00 a.m. on September 22, 2015 and show cause 4 as to why this case should not be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure 5 to prosecute and failure to comply with the orders of the court. 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Plaintiff is warned that his failure to appear at the hearing will result in the court dismissing this action. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 25, 2015 ______________________________________ NANDOR J. VADAS United States Magistrate Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 EUREKA DIVISION 4 5 INES MENDEZ, Case No. 14-cv-03756-NJV Plaintiff, 6 v. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 CALIFORNIA FORENSIC MEDICAL GROUP, INC., et al., Defendants. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. That on August 25, 2015, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 16 17 INES MENDES 4014 Little Fairfield Eureka, CA 95501 18 19 INES MENDES 2101 Spring Street Eureka, CA 95501 20 22 Stephen Turner Davies Turner Litigation Services P.O. Box 319 Eureka, CA 95502 23 Dated: August 25, 2015 21 24 Richard W. Wieking Clerk, United States District Court 25 26 27 28 By:________________________ Robert Illman, Deputy Clerk to the Honorable NANDOR J. VADAS 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?