Lee v. California Public Utilities Commission et al

Filing 171

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granting in part #157 Motion for Sanctions. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

ALIK LEE,
Plaintiff,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

14

Case No.16-cv-00983-VC (JSC)
ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S THIRD
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

v.
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMMISSION,

Re: Dkt. No. 157

Defendant.

15
16

Plaintiff Alik Yusef Lee filed this Title VII employment discrimination action against his

17

former employer, the California Public Utilities Commission. On June 6, 2017, the district court

18

granted Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and issued judgment in its favor. (Dkt. Nos.

19

169 & 170.) Defendant’s third motion for sanctions remains pending before the Court. (Dkt. No.

20

157.) Defendant contends that sanctions are warranted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

21

37(b)(2)(A) based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s February 10, 2017 discovery

22

order in three ways: (1) failing to provide responsive documents, (2) failing to pay previously

23

ordered sanctions, and (3) continuing to use Jose Ruiz, his self-titled “communications proxy,”

24

who is not an attorney, to communicate with counsel. Defendant seeks an order precluding

25

Plaintiff from presenting evidence of his alleged lost wages at trial and awarding Defendant its

26

attorneys’ fees for preparing the motion for sanctions in the amount of $1,320.00.

27
28

Given the district court’s grant of summary judgment in Defendant’s favor, the request for
evidence preclusion sanctions is moot; however, the request for monetary sanctions is not.

1

Plaintiff was previously ordered to pay $500 in sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

2

37(a)(5)(A) based on his flagrant disregard of the discovery rules. (Dkt. No. 140.) Plaintiff has

3

failed to pay those court ordered sanctions and continued to disregard this Court’s orders to

4

provide Defendant with discovery. Plaintiff does not deny that he failed to provide the discovery

5

ordered by the Court or pay the Court ordered sanction. (Dkt. No. 160.)

6

Given Plaintiff’s continued failure to comply with his discovery obligations and this

7

Court’s orders, Defendant’s motion for sanctions is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff is ordered to

8

pay Defendant $1,320 for its reasonable expenses incurred in filing yet another motion for

9

sanctions. Plaintiff shall remit this amount and the previously ordered $500 in sanctions (if not

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

already paid) to Defendant within 30 days of this Order.
This Order terminates Docket No. 157.

12
13

14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 12, 2017

15
16
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
United States Magistrate Judge

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