Wine Bottle Recycling LLC v. Niagra Systems LLC et al
Filing
145
ORDER re: SANCTIONS. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on February 21, 2014. (sclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
WINE BOTTLE RECYCLING, LLC,
10
Plaintiff,
11
12
v.
NIAGARA SYSTEMS LLC, et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
) Case No. C-12-1924 SC
)
) ORDER RE: SANCTIONS
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
15
16
On January 10, 2014, the Court held a pretrial conference and
17
a show-cause hearing in the above-captioned action.
18
ordered Plaintiff Wine Bottle Recycling, LLC to show cause why its
19
continuing failure to adhere rigidly to Court orders and rules of
20
procedure did not warrant sanctions.
21
parties explained their positions in open court, and the Court
22
determined that sanctions, pursuant to the Court's inherent powers
23
or 28 U.S.C. § 1927, would be appropriate in this case.
24
asked Defendant Niagara Systems, LLC -- the sole remaining
25
defendant in this case -- to submit a bill of costs related to its
26
responses to Plaintiff's deficient and prejudicial filings, which
27
it did.
28
Court that this case was not ready for trial.
ECF No. 142.
The Court had
See ECF No. 107 ("OSC").
The
The Court
By this point it was also obvious to the
Some mistakes during the course of litigation are predictable
1
is unnecessarily protracted, and the litigants are prejudiced.
4
Plaintiff's prosecution of this case has been littered with such
5
mistakes.
6
and time the Court has spent dealing with Plaintiff's mistakes is
7
time taken from other cases on the docket.
8
instance the Court cannot find evidence on the record that
9
Plaintiff's counsel acted in bad faith, recklessly, or frivolously
10
United States District Court
and forgivable.
3
For the Northern District of California
2
But when those mistakes are repeated, litigation
-- all findings required for the Court to issue sanctions, whether
11
under its inherent powers, Rule 11, or 28 U.S.C. § 1927.
12
lawyering is not necessarily frivolous, reckless, or bad faith
13
lawyering.
14
sanction Plaintiff's counsel. 1
15
history, the Court finds that if Plaintiff's counsel continues to
16
fail to follow rules and orders precisely, it is likely that the
17
only possible explanation will be bad faith.
18
Plaintiff has one last chance.
Defendant has clearly been prejudiced to some degree,
However, in this
The Court therefore lacks the legal authority to
However, given this case's long
In other words:
This case involves only two parties and one claim.
19
Negligent
It is not
20
complicated.
As both parties should note, throughout the pretrial
21
process the Court has repeatedly found that there is a real dispute
22
in these facts.
23
The Court therefore refers this case to a magistrate judge for
The case could very easily be tried or settled.
24
25
26
27
28
1
The Court also notes that Defendant's bill of costs was excessive
and not itemized in a way that would allow the Court to analyze the
billing and fairly allocate costs to a sanctioned party. Block
billing reports that do not provide hourly rates and attorney task
descriptions are sometimes not transparent enough for courts to
analyze fully. Further, some of Defendant's rates and hours seem
excessive for the task, and in such cases it would be difficult for
the Court to award fees or costs reasonably and fairly.
2
1
settlement discussions.
Further, a trial-setting conference in
2
this case is set for May 2, 2014.
3
before then, they shall inform the Court immediately.
4
not settle the case, any further pretrial disputes, including
5
discovery matters, will be referred to a magistrate judge for
6
resolution prior to the Court's trial-setting conference and
7
subsequent trial.
If the parties settle the case
If they do
8
Both parties are on notice that any further lateness or
9
failure to adhere to court orders or procedural rules will result
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
in this case's dismissal with prejudice and potential sanctions.
11
12
IT IS SO ORDERED.
13
14
Dated: February 21, 2014
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?