ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND IMPOSING SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY (ECF Nos. 27, 29)

DISPOSITIVE DOCUMENTS DUE OCTOBER 6, 2015

STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.

On September 22, 2015, the Court held a show cause hearing for Plaintiff Beatriz Lara to show cause why sanctions should not be issued against her for the failure to comply with multiple court orders. Plaintiff Beatriz Lara personally appeared at the hearing with counsel M. Greg Mullanax. For the reasons set forth below, the Court imposes sanctions in the amount of $600.00, payable to the Clerk of the Court, against attorney M. Greg Mullanax.

I.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Beatriz Lara filed this action on January 23, 2014 against Defendant DNC Parks & Resorts at Tenaya, Inc. (ECF No. 1.) After District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill issued an order granting in part and denying in part Defendant's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 16), Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto conducted a settlement conference during which the parties settled this action (ECF No. 18.) On July 28, 2015, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement. (ECF No. 19.) Thereafter, this Court issued an order requiring the parties to file dispositive documents by August 31, 2015. (ECF No. 20.) The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. (ECF Nos. 23, 24.) However, the parties did not file dispositive documents or otherwise responded to the Court's July 29, 2015 order.

On September 2, 2015, Plaintiff was ordered to show cause in writing by September 9, 2015, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the July 29, 2015 order. (ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff did not respond to the September 2, 2015 order. On September 10, 2015, an order issued requiring Plaintiff to personally appear for an order to show cause hearing on September 15, 2015. (ECF No. 27.) Plaintiff did not appear at the September 15, 2015 show cause hearing. (ECF No. 28.) The Court then issued an order imposing sanctions of $100.00 for the failure to appear for the show cause hearing and an additional $100.00 per day for every day Plaintiff failed to respond in writing to the Court's order. (ECF No. 29.) In the order, Plaintiff and her counsel were ordered to personally appear for a show cause hearing on September 22, 2015. (Id.)

On September 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed a response to the order to show cause. (ECF No. 31.) Plaintiff's counsel accepted responsibility for the failure to file dispositive documents as he did not realize they had not been returned to Defense counsel until after he received the first order to show cause. (ECF No. 30-1 at ¶ 7.) Additionally, he incorrectly calendared the date that he was required to respond to the order to show cause. (Id. at ¶ 6.)

II.

DISCUSSION

"Failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court." Local Rule 110. The Court possesses inherent authority to impose sanctions to manage its own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases. Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 43 (1991).

In the Court's September 15 Order, the Court sanctioned Plaintiff in the amount of $100.00 for the failure to appear at the show cause hearing, payable to the Clerk of the Court. That sanction shall remain in effect.

The September 15 Order also issued additional sanctions at a rate of $100 per day for every day Plaintiff failed to respond to the Court's orders to show cause. See Lasar v. Ford Motor Co., 399 F.3d 1101, 1110 (9th Cir. 2005) (discussing court's authority to impose civil sanctions "intended to be remedial by coercing the defendant to do what he had refused to do."). Plaintiff did not respond to the Court's order until September 21, 2015, so an additional sanction of $500.00, payable to the Clerk of the Court, shall be imposed for this period of time.

Accordingly, the total amount of monetary sanctions issued by this Court against Plaintiff under both this order and the September 15 order shall be $600.00. Since it is apparent that Plaintiff's attorney, but not Plaintiff herself, was solely responsible for the failure to comply with the Court's order, the Court will impose these sanctions solely on Plaintiff's attorney.

III.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

IT IS SO ORDERED.