Chavez v. Bank of America Corporation

Filing 43

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Show Cause Response due by 5/4/2017. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 4/20/2017. (kawlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/20/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

LUCIA B. CHAVEZ,
Plaintiff,

8

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v.

9
10

BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 15-cv-02756-KAW

Defendant.

12
On June 18, 2015, Plaintiff filed the instant complaint against Defendant Bank of America

13
14

Corporation, alleging violations of Federal Regulation E and the Electronic Funds Transfer Act.

15

(Compl., Dkt. No. 1.) On April 10, 2017, Defendant requested a telephonic discovery conference,

16

on the ground that Plaintiff was failing to comply with her discovery obligations. (Dkt. No. 40.)

17

Specifically, Defendant stated that Plaintiff had failed to: (1) respond substantively to Defendant's

18

meet and confer attempts, (2) provide promised discovery, and (3) communicate generally with

19

Defendant. (Id. at 1; see also Kenney Decl. ¶¶ 5 (identifying documents Plaintiff has not turned

20

over); 6 (Plaintiff's provision of 64 pages of documents that were not related to her alleged travel);

21

7 (Plaintiff stating at her deposition that she had additional documents to produce), 8, 11

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

(Plaintiff's continued failure to produce the documents she said she would produce).) The Court
also previously admonished Plaintiff about participating in the case. For example, at the August 2,
2016 case management conference, after Plaintiff's counsel stated that he had not heard from the
plaintiff, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file a status report indicating whether or not she intended to
prosecute the case. (Dkt. No. 26.) The Court again admonished Plaintiff about participating in the
case at the February 21, 2017 case management conference.1
1

The February 21, 2017 case management conference had been continued from February 14,

1

On April 18, 2017, the Court held a telephonic discovery conference with the parties.

2

There, Plaintiff's counsel indicated that he had not heard from Plaintiff since early March, despite

3

numerous attempts to reach her.

4

In light of the above, Plaintiff is ordered, on or before May 4, 2017, to respond to this

5

order to show cause by explaining why the instant case should not be dismissed for failure to

6

prosecute. Failure to respond to this order will result in dismissal of the case.

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 20, 2017
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2017, due to Plaintiff's failure to participate in drafting the joint case management statement
despite Defendant's efforts to meet and confer. (See Dkt. No. 33.)
2