Jugoz v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al

Filing 73

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MONETARY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED. Plaintiff is ordered to show cause in writing, no later than August 2, 2017, why monetary sanctions should not be imposed. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on 07/26/17. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/26/2017)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

RUDOLPH JUGOZ,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10
11

v.
EXPERIAN INFORMATION
SOLUTIONS, INC., et al.,

Case No. 16-cv-05687-MMC
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
MONETARY SANCTIONS SHOULD
NOT BE IMPOSED
Re: Dkt. No. 70

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.
12
13

By order filed July 17, 2017, the Court found plaintiff had violated the Civil Local

14

Rules of this District and the Court’s Standing Orders by failing to provide a chambers

15

copy of his amended complaint, see Civil L.R. 5-1(e)(7); Standing Orders For Civil Cases

16

Assigned to The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney ¶ 2, and directed plaintiff to submit a

17

chambers copy of that document no later than July 24, 2017. By said order, the Court

18

advised plaintiff that if no chambers copy was submitted by July 24, 2017, the amended

19

complaint would be stricken from the record. To date, no such chambers copy has been

20

submitted.

21

The Court has repeatedly advised plaintiff of his failure to comply with the Civil

22

Local Rules of this District and the Court’s Standing Orders and warned plaintiff that

23

sanctions may be imposed, including, but not limited to, striking from the record any

24

further electronically filed document for which a chambers copy has not been timely

25

provided to the court. (See Order, filed July 17, 2017; Order, filed Dec. 8, 2016; Order,

26

filed Nov. 1, 2016.) Despite those reminders and warnings, plaintiff has again failed to

27

provide a chambers copy to the court.

28

Under such circumstances, the Court finds it appropriate to impose sanctions.

1

See Civil L.R. 1-4 (providing “[f]ailure by counsel or a party to comply with any duly

2

promulgated local rule or any Federal Rule may be a ground for imposition of any

3

authorized sanction”).

4

As to the form of those sanctions, the Court notes that the procedural posture of

5

the action has changed since the Court issued its July 17, 2017 order. In particular,

6

although, at the time of the Court’s order, no response had been filed to plaintiff’s

7

amended complaint, defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. thereafter filed an

8

answer. Given the current status of the pleadings, the Court finds the imposition of

9

monetary sanctions more appropriate than an order striking plaintiff’s amended

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

complaint.
Accordingly, plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing, no later
than August 2, 2017, why monetary sanctions should not be imposed.

13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

Dated: July 26, 2017
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

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