Paguada v. Taza Chocolate Cafe, LLC

Filing 30

ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Mr. Khaimov is directed to pay $500 in fines to the Clerk of Court by no later than Friday, June 11, 2021. In response to the order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed (Dkt. 23), Mr. Khaimov repres ented to the Court that he had instituted a number of reforms in his office to ensure that there would be no further failures to comply with Court orders. See Resp., Dkt. 25. Given his failure to comply with the Orderthat had been entered in Paguada v. FYF-Eves, LLC just three weeks after his commitment to make those changes, it is apparent that either he did not make the changes, or the changes are wholly inadequate to ensure compliance with Court Orders. The Court forewarned Mr. Khaimov that t he sanctions would come due if he was unable to comply with all Court Orders and rules without reminders from Chambers. See Order, Dkt. 27. The Court is disappointed that Mr.Khaimov's compliance lasted less than three weeks. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Khaimov must file proof of payment of the sanctions on the docket in this matter by no later than Tuesday, June 15, 2021. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Valerie E. Caproni on 6/07/2021) (ama)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------- X DILENIA PAGUADA, : : Plaintiff, : -against: : WHITMORE FAMILY ENTERPRISES, LLC, : : Defendant. : -------------------------------------------------------------- X USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILED: 6/7/2021 20-CV-8922 (VEC) ORDER VALERIE CAPRONI, United States District Judge: WHEREAS on May 17, 2021, the Court ordered Mr. Khaimov to pay $500 in fines to the Clerk of Court pursuant to Rule 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for repeated failure to comply with Court Orders and rules, Dkt. 27; WHEREAS the Court deferred the payment of sanctions for a period of one year, noting that if Mr. Khaimov could comply with all Court orders and rules for the next 12 months without reminders from Chambers, the Court would expunge the sanctions and vacate the sanctions order, id.; WHEREAS Mr. Khaimov was counsel of record for the plaintiff in the case, Paguada v. FYF-Eve’s, LLC, 20-CV-8268, which was also before the undersigned; WHEREAS in that matter, the parties’ joint pre-conference submission was due on Thursday, June 3, 2021, see 20-CV-8268, Dkt. 14 ¶ 10; WHEREAS no submission was received by the deadline; and WHEREAS after a reminder from Chambers, Mr. Khaimov filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice on behalf of his client, see 20-CV-8268, Dkt. 16; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Mr. Khaimov is directed to pay $500 in fines to the Clerk of Court by no later than Friday, June 11, 2021. In response to the order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed (Dkt. 23), Mr. Khaimov represented to the Court that he had instituted a number of reforms in his office to ensure that there would be no further failures to comply with Court orders. See Resp., Dkt. 25. Given his failure to comply with the Order that had been entered in Paguada v. FYF-Eve’s, LLC just three weeks after his commitment to make those changes, it is apparent that either he did not make the changes, or the changes are wholly inadequate to ensure compliance with Court Orders. The Court forewarned Mr. Khaimov that the sanctions would come due if he was unable to comply with all Court Orders and rules without reminders from Chambers. See Order, Dkt. 27. The Court is disappointed that Mr. Khaimov’s compliance lasted less than three weeks. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Khaimov must file proof of payment of the sanctions on the docket in this matter by no later than Tuesday, June 15, 2021. SO ORDERED. ________________________ VALERIE CAPRONI United States District Judge Date: June 7, 2021 New York, New York 2

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?