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)

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