American General Life Insurance Company v. Burrell et al

Filing 57

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE ISSUED FOR REPEATED FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS. Show Cause Response due by 8/18/2017.Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on August 16, 2017. (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/16/2017)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6

AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY,
Plaintiffs,

7
8
9
10

ANTONIO BURRELL, et al.,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE ISSUED
FOR REPEATED FAILURE TO
COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS
Dkt. No. 56

Defendants.
On February 15, 2017, the court stayed this interpleader action and ordered Defendants

12

Lesia Habte and Antonio Burrell (collectively “Defendants”) to file a joint status report every 90

13

days. [Docket No. 49]. Because Defendants failed to file their first joint status report, even after

14

being ordered to do so, the court issued an order to show cause why Defendants should not be

15

sanctioned for their failure to comply with court orders. [Docket No. 52].

16

On June 7, 2017, after reviewing Defendants’ late responses to the order to show cause, the

17

court discharged the order to show cause. [Docket No. 56]. However, the court expressly warned

18

Defendants that “further failure to submit timely status reports will result in sanctions.” [Docket

19

No. 56]. The court provided the deadline for the next joint status report, August 14, 2017, and

20

stressed that “[c]ounsel are expected to calendar these dates going forward.” [Docket No. 56].

21

No joint status report was filed by August 14, 2017. This is the second time in a row that
Defendants have failed to comply with the court’s orders. Accordingly, Defendants are ordered to

23

respond by August 18, 2017, and show cause why they should not be sanctioned for their repeated

24

failure to follow court orders.

R NIA

______________________________________
u
Donnaonna M. Ry
M. Ryu
Judge D
United States Magistrate Judge
FO

H

ER

LI

RT

28

ERED
O ORD

IT IS S

NO

27

Dated: August 16, 2017

A

26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

25

S

22

UNIT
ED

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

v.

Case No. 16-cv-01375-DMR

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C