Johnson v. Miri Piri, Inc.

Full title: SCOTT JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. MIRI PIRI, INC., et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 21, 2015

2:14-cv-1442-GEB-KJN (E.D. Cal. Sep. 21, 2015)

Opinion

SCOTT JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. MIRI PIRI, INC., et al., Defendants. No. 2:14-cv-1442-GEB-KJN United States District Court, E.D. California. September 21, 2015

          ORDER

          KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

         On August 20, 2015, the court issued an order requiring the parties to meet and confer to explore potential settlement of the case. (ECF No. 13.) In the event that they were unable to informally settle the case, the parties were directed to file a joint statement, no later than September 3, 2015, addressing very specific topics and providing very specific information regarding their meet-and-confer session and the scheduling of a settlement conference. (Id.) Instead, on September 3, 2015, the parties merely filed a two-sentence joint status report indicating that the parties have been unable to reach a settlement. (ECF No. 14.)

         Because the parties' filing failed to comply with the court's August 20, 2015 order, the court struck that filing on September 4, 2015. (ECF No. 15.) In that order, the parties were directed to file a compliant joint statement within fourteen (14) days. (Id.) The parties were also specifically cautioned that future failure to comply with court orders may result in the imposition of sanctions. (Id.)

         Thereafter, on September 8, 2015, the parties filed a joint status report, merely stating: "The parties have been unable to reach a settlement in this case. The case still remains unresolved." (ECF No. 16.) The report again failed to provide the specific information required by the court's prior orders. (Id.) The report was submitted under the joint signatures of Phyl Grace, as counsel for plaintiff, and Michael Welch, as counsel for defendants. (Id.) Although the 14-day deadline has now expired, the parties have yet to provide the required information.

         It is unclear whether the parties are willfully failing to provide the required information or whether their failure is simply attributable to carelessness. Regardless, sanctions are appropriate at this juncture.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within fourteen (14) days of this order, plaintiff's counsel and defendants' counsel shall EACH pay the Clerk of Court $150.00 in sanctions based on their failure to comply with the court's prior orders.

2. Within fourteen (14) days of this order, the parties shall file a joint statement that complies with the court's August 20, 2015 order.

3. Failure to timely comply with this order will result in increased sanctions.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.