Ho v. Pinsukanjana, et al.

Filing 133

ORDER by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton adopting in part 122 Report and Recommendations as to 93 Motion for Sanctions. (pjhlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/7/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

RITA C HO,

Case No. 17-cv-06520-PJH
Plaintiff,

8

ORDER ADOPTING IN PART
MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION

v.
9
10

MARK PINSUKANJANA, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 122

Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

The court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson's Report and

13

Recommendation Re: Motion for Sanctions. Dkt. 122 (the “R&R”). The court has

14

received no objections and the deadline to file such objections has now passed. The

15

court finds the report correct, well-reasoned and thorough. The court ADOPTS the R&R

16

IN PART, and ORDERS as follows:

17
18

1) The court ADOPTS the R&R’s first recommendation and DENIES plaintiff’s
request for termination sanctions.

19

2) The court ADOPTS the R&R’s second recommendation and extends the

20

discovery deadline for the limited purpose of allowing defendants to fully

21

comply with Judge Hixson’s February 20, 2019 discovery order, see Dkt. 90,

22

and to allow plaintiff to take defendants’ supplemental depositions. Defendants

23

SHALL produce all responsive documents no later than 10 days from the date

24

of this order. Any supplemental depositions SHALL be completed no later than

25

30 days from the date of this order.

26
27
28

3) The court ADOPTS the R&R’s third recommendation and DENIES plaintiff’s
request for evidentiary sanctions.
4) Defendants are hereby WARNED that any further failure to comply with their

1

discovery obligations or court orders may result in the court awarding

2

evidentiary or case-dispositive sanctions.

3
4
5

5) The court ADOPTS the R&R’s fourth recommendation and GRANTS plaintiff’s
request for attorneys’ fees in the amount of $12,275.25; and
6) The court DECLINES TO ADOPT the R&R’s fifth recommendation. In light of

6

the warning above and the possibility of further sanctions, including terminating

7

sanctions, the court declines to hold defendants in contempt.

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 7, 2019
_________________________________
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2