Johnson v. Lin et al

Filing 30

ORDER IN ANTICIPATION OF THEJANUARY 19, 2019 HEARING (svklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/25/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

SCOTT JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 18-cv-01095-SVK
ORDER IN ANTICIPATION OF THE
JANUARY 19, 2019 HEARING

v.
TSUNG-YEN LIN, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 28, 29

Defendants.

12
13

The Parties, through counsel, notified the Court that the case had settled on November 9,

14

2018. ECF 24. The Court issued an Order to Show Cause on November 13, 2018, setting forth

15

that the Parties had until January 8, 2019, to file a stipulation of dismissal. ECF 26. The Court

16

further ordered that if a dismissal was not filed by that date, the Parties were to appear on January

17

15, 2019, to show cause as to why the case should not be dismissed and file a statement advising

18

the Court as to (1) the status of the Parties’ efforts to finalize settlement, and (2) how much

19

additional time was necessary to finalize the settlement and file the dismissal. Id.

20

On January 8th, the Parties jointly represented to this Court that they “have been working

21

diligently, but at this point, are still reviewing and editing the terms of the agreement.” ECF 27.

22

The Parties further represented that the settlement agreement “should be executed soon” yet

23

inexplicably requested another 60 days to file a dismissal. Id. The Court denied that request as

24

excessive and ordered the Parties to file a dismissal by January 23, 2019, or to appear on January,

25

29, 2019, to show cause as to why the case should not be dismissed. ECF 28.

26

On January 23, 2019, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a statement, under oath, contravening ECF

27

27 and stating that Defendants had not participated in the settlement process since December 28,

28

2018. ECF 29. Plaintiff also misrepresents that the deadline to file a dismissal is January 29,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

2019, when in fact, it was January 23, 2019. Id.
This matter is on the Court’s calendar for January 29, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. In anticipation
of those proceedings, the Court ORDERS as follows:
1. Counsel for both Parties will appear in person. Any previous orders permitting
telephonic appearances are revoked.
2. At the hearing, the Court will require an explanation from Plaintiff’s counsel as to their
misrepresentations regarding settlement proceedings;

8

3. The Court will also set a case schedule through trial at that time;

9

4. The Parties are to meet and confer immediately regarding a schedule that both addresses
the steps set forth in General Order 56 on an expedited basis and has this case prepared for

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

trial on November 19, 2019, and the Parties shall be prepared to discuss that schedule with

12

the Court at the hearing on January 29, 2019.

13

SO ORDERED.

14
15

Dated: January 25, 2019

16
17
SUSAN VAN KEULEN
United States Magistrate Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2