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)

Download PDF
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

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?