Santiago v. Whole House Building Supply et al

Filing 55

ORDER re 51 First MOTION to Dismiss AND FOR SANCTIONS filed by Paul Gardener, Hearing set for 9/16/2011 02:00 PM. Response due by 9/9/2011. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on September 8, 2011. (psglc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/8/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

9

JOSE SANTIAGO,

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

Plaintiff,
v.
PAUL GARDENER, dba, WHOLE
HOUSE BUILDING SUPPLY,

13
14

Defendant.
___________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: C 10-2526 PSG
ORDER RE MOTION TO DISMISS
(Re: Docket No. 51)

15
On September 6, 2011, Adam Wang (“Wang”), counsel for Plaintiff Jose Santiago
16
(“Santiago”) and Katherine Clark (“Clark”), counsel for Defendant Paul Gardener, dba Whole
17
House Building Supply (“Gardener”), appeared for a final pretrial conference. Unfortunately, the
18
court was unable to proceed with pretrial matters as scheduled. The reason is that the parties failed
19
20

to file in a timely manner all materials necessary for a productive conference,1 including trial briefs,
proposed voir dire and verdict forms, a joint pretrial statement, and motions in limine.2 In particular,

21
Wang failed to comply with the court’s standing order to meet and confer with Gardener and Clark,
22
failed to meet multiple pretrial filing deadlines, and ultimately filed his pretrial materials late and up
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The court recognizes that Gardener, acting at the time in pro se, made multiple efforts to meet
and confer with Wang, and ultimately filed a separate pretrial conference statement, trial exhibits, and
proposed jury voir dire. See Docket Nos. 44, 45.
2

See Standing Order for Civil Practice in Cases Assigned for all Purposes to Magistrate Judge
Paul S. Grewal (December 2010).
ORDER, page 1

1

to the last minute.3

2

In view of Wang’s intransigence in working with Gardener to meet deadlines and apparent

3

lack of good faith in preparing for trial, Gardener filed a motion to dismiss and motion for sanctions

4

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f) and 37(b)(2)(C). The court has taken Gardener’s motion under

5

submission and will allow Santiago and Wang until Friday, September 9, 2011 at 5:00 p.m. to file a

6

written response. The court will hear oral argument on the motion to dismiss at hearing on Tuesday,

7

September 16, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. Until resolution of the motion to dismiss, the court will stay

8

Gardener’s deadlines to submit remaining pretrial materials. The trial date remains September 19,

9

2011.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

Dated: September 8, 2011

12
PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

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

3

Based on the court’s standing order and the pretrial conference calendar date of September 6,
2011, Wang should have met and conferred with Gardener by August 16, 2011, filed a trial brief and
motions in limine by August 29, and together with Gardener, filed a joint pretrial conference statement
by August 29, 2011. Instead, Wang filed his trial brief on September 6, 2011 minutes before the pretrial
conference time, a motion in limine on September 2, 2011, and a separate pretrial conference statement
on August 29, 2011. See Docket Nos. 42-48, 53.
ORDER, page 2