Trabakoolas et al v. Watts Water Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 42

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING DEFENDANTS' FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CIVIL LOCAL RULE 7-2 AND THIS COURT'S STANDING ORDER IN CIVIL CASES Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 5/4/2012 09:01 AM. Show Cause Response due by 4/30/2012. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 4/26/12. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2012)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 5 6 JASON TRABAKOOLAS and SHIELA STETSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 7 8 Plaintiffs, Case No.: 12-cv-01172-YGR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CIVIL LOCAL RULE 7-2 AND THIS COURT’S STANDING ORDER IN CIVIL CASES vs. 9 10 Northern District of California United States District Court 11 WATTS WATER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Defendants. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TO DEFENDANTS WATTS REGULATOR CO., WATTS WATER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., and WOLVERINE BRASS, INC. AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: The above-named Defendants’ counsel Lindsay Carlson is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why she should not be sanctioned for failing to comply with Civil Local Rule 7-2 (“Civ. L.R. 7-2”) regarding noticing hearing dates and this Court’s Standing Order in Civil Cases (“Standing Order”) reflecting the same. Civ. L.R. 7-2 states that: “Except as otherwise ordered or permitted by the assigned Judge or these Local Rules, and except for motions made during the course of a trial or hearing, all motions must be filed, served and noticed in writing on the motion calendar of the assigned Judge for hearing not less than 35 days after service of the motion.” Further, the Court’s Standing Order states at Section 3 regarding Changes to Court Calendar: “No changes to the Court’s schedule shall be made except by signed order of the Court and only upon a showing of good cause. Parties seeking to continue hearings, request special status conferences, modify briefing schedules, or make any other procedural changes shall submit a signed stipulation and proposed order, or, if stipulation is not possible, a Motion for Administrative Relief, as contemplated by Civil Local Rule 7-11.” Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on April 25, 2012. (Dkt. No. 37.) Thirty-five days from 1 2 that date would be May 30, 2012. Under the Court’s Standing Order, civil law and motion is 3 scheduled for Tuesdays at 2:00 p.m. As such, the earliest date upon which Defendants may have 4 noticed a hearing on their motion to dismiss is June 5, 2012. Defendants have violated both the Local 5 Rules and this Court’s Standing Order by significantly shortening the 35 day period. The Local Rules 6 clearly provide the Court with fourteen (14) days to consider parties’ briefs before hearing a motion. 7 See Civ. L.R. 7-3 (requiring, in addition to the 35 day notice period, that an opposition be filed and 8 served not more than fourteen (14) days after the motion, and the reply not more than seven (7) days 9 after the opposition). Here, Defendants have attempted to provide the Court with a mere six (6) day 10 period to prepare for the motion.1 Northern District of California United States District Court 11 A hearing on this Order to Show Cause shall be held on Friday, May 4, 2012, on the Court’s 12 9:01 a.m. calendar, in the Federal Courthouse, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California, in a courtroom 13 to be designated. Defendants’ counsel must file a written response to this Order to Show Cause no 14 later than April 30, 2012 explaining why she would presume that Defendants’ motion should be heard 15 in advance of others who had properly noticed motions on a 35-day track. Defendants’ counsel 16 should also certify that she has rectified the errors by re-noticing the hearing date and changing the 17 response deadlines in ECF, and that she has personally read the Court’s Standing Order in Civil 18 Cases. Defendants’ counsel must appear personally at the hearing. If the Court is satisfied with Defendants’ counsel’s response, it will consider taking the Order 19 20 to Show Cause hearing off calendar. IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 22 23 Dated: April 26, 2012 ____________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28 1 Defendants were on further notice that shortening the Court’s time is improper based on other portions of Section 3 in the Standing Order, which state that “[b]riefing schedules may not be changed by stipulation” and that “[p]arties are advised that requests which, in effect, decrease the Court’s time to consider a motion in advance of the hearing date are denied routinely.” 2

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?