Zhou et al v. David et al

Filing 66

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TO PLAINTIFFS. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 11/2/2011. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/2/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15

No. C09-6059 JSC

ZHI YANG ZHOU, et al.,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TO
PLAINTIFFS

Plaintiffs,
v.
JIANG DAVID, et al.,
Defendants.
/

16
17

On August 30, 2011, the parties stipulated to continue the case management

18

conference (“CMC”) scheduled for August 31, 2011 to September 15, 2011. The parties

19

explained that Plaintiffs’ counsel Adam Wang had been “informed that a new counsel has

20

been retained for Plaintiffs to substitute in his place” but that no substitution had yet been

21

made. (Dkt. No. 61.) Upon this representation the Court continued the CMC to the parties’

22

chosen date, September 15, 2011.

23

Plaintiffs did not submit a case management conference statement for the September

24

15, 2011 CMC. Nor had new counsel substituted in for Plaintiffs’ counsel. In order to give

25

Plaintiffs yet a further opportunity to substitute new counsel, the Court continued the CMC to

26

November 3, 2011 and admonished Plaintiffs’ counsel to file a Joint Case Management

27

Conference Statement.

28

Unfortunately, as of the date of this Order--the day before the CMC--Plaintiffs have,

1

once again, not submitted a CMC statement, either jointly or separately. Nor did Plaintiffs’

2

counsel even respond to a courtesy email reminder sent by the Deputy Clerk. And Plaintiffs’

3

counsel has not moved to withdraw. These failures are not the first time Plaintiffs have

4

ignored the rules of the Court in this action. In July 2011, the settlement judge, Magistrate

5

Judge Zimmerman, ordered Plaintiffs to show cause why they should not be sanctioned for

6

failing to timely file a settlement conference statement. (Dkt. No. 54.)
Accordingly, in light of Plaintiffs’ repeated failures to file case management

8

conference statements, and their apparent inability to settle on representation in this case,

9

Plaintiffs are ordered to show cause why this action should not be dismissed pursuant to

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

7

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 for a failure to prosecute. The Court will address the

11

matter at the case management conference scheduled for 1:30 p.m. tomorrow, November 3,

12

2011.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15

Dated: November 2, 2011
16

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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