Perez v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation et al

Filing 57

ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. The case management conference is continued to 10/16/13. Counsel for Perez shall file a response to the OSC no later than 10/4/13. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on 9/16/13. (jstlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/16/2013)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

APRIL PEREZ,

Case No. 11-cv-02134-JST

Plaintiff,
9
v.
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION,
et al.,

ORDER CONTINUING CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Defendants.
13
On April 22, 2013, the Court issued an order to show cause why counsel for Plaintiff

14
15

Perez, William Reustle and Donald Mah, should not be sanctioned for failure to comply with the

16

Court’s orders, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the local rules of this district. ECF No.

17

52. The Court ordered counsel to file a response to this order by May 1, 2013, to serve a copy of

18

the order on Perez, and to file a certificate of service no later than April 29, 2013. Id. Counsel did

19

not comply with the April 22 order in any respect.

20

The Court held a case management conference on June 27, 2013, during which it addressed

21

counsel’s failure to comply with the April 22 order. Mah appeared on behalf of Perez; Reustle did

22

not appear. After the conference, on June 28, 2013, the Court issued an order in which (1) it

23

required Mah to file a notice of appearance in accordance with Civil Local Rule 5-1(c) by June 28,

24

2013; (2) it required counsel for Perez to serve a copy of the Court’s April 22 order and a

25

certificate of service no later than July 5, 2013; and (3) it declined to impose sanctions on either

26

Mah or Reustle, finding that sanctions were unwarranted in light of Mah’s statements at the

27

conference.

28

///

1

As of the date of this order, Mah has not filed a notice of appearance, and neither Mah nor

2

Reustle has filed a certificate of service showing that counsel have served the Court’s April 22

3

order on Perez. Accordingly, the case management conference scheduled for September 18, 2013,

4

is VACATED. Mah and Reustle are ordered to show cause by October 4, 2013, in writing, why

5

they should not be sanctioned for failure to comply with the Court’s June 28 order. See Miranda

6

v. S. Pac. Transp. Co., 710 F.2d 516, 521 (9th Cir. 1983) (discussing the types of sanctions that a

7

district court may impose on a noncomplying attorney); see also Civil L.R. 1-4 (“Failure by

8

counsel or a party to comply with any duly promulgated local rule or any Federal Rule may be a

9

ground for imposition of any authorized sanction.”); Civil L.R. 11-6 (discussing the authority of a
district judge to refer an attorney who has engaged in unprofessional conduct to the Court’s

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Standing Committee on Professional Conduct or to the Chief District Judge). A case management

12

conference will be held on October 16, 2013.

13

Dated: September 16, 2013

14

_______________________________________

15
JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge

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