Walker v. Target Corporation

Filing 20

ORDER REOPENING CASE; CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES REINSTATED. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 11/2/2011. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/2/2011)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

Northern District of California

5
6

TENNIEL WALKER,

No. CV11-02368 MEJ
Plaintiff,

7

ORDER REOPENING CASE

v.
8
TARGET CORPORATION,
9
10

Defendant.
_____________________________________/

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11
On November 2, 2011, the Court dismissed this case without prejudice for failure to

13

prosecute. Dkt. No. 18. However, the Court is now in receipt of Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration, in

14

which he states that he “had inadvertently not read recent emails regarding discovery standing orders

15

in this matter and failed to contact defense counsel to meet and confer on discovery issues,” and that

16

he has now “contacted defense counsel and met and conferred on the discovery issues and the

17

disclosure statement” and “discussed tentative deposition dates and the upcoming Mediation date.”

18

Dkt. No. 19. Although Plaintiff filed this declaration after the November 1 deadline set in the

19

Court’s order to show cause, (Dkt. No. 16), Plaintiff’s counsel contacted the Clerk’s Office and

20

explained that he prepared the declaration by the deadline, but e-filing problems caused it to be filed

21

late. Based on Plaintiff’s representations, it appears that his case should be permitted to go forward.

22

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS the Clerk of Court to re-open this case. All dates in the

23

August 22, 2011 scheduling order are re-instated. Dkt. No. 9. Plaintiff should be mindful that any

24

future failure to comply with court orders and deadlines will likely result in sanctions.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27
28

Dated: November 2, 2011
_______________________________
Maria-Elena James
Chief United States Magistrate Judge