Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

BIGGS v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., 5:16-cv-01507-EJD. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160901887 Visitors: 10
Filed: Aug. 31, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 31, 2016
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION EDWARD J. DAVILA , District Judge . On August 15, 2016, the court issued an order requiring Plaintiff and all defendants who have appeared in this action but have not filed a Notice of Settlement to meet and confer in order to reach an agreement on an ADR process and file, within 10 days, either (1) a stipulation embodying their agreement, or (2) the form entitled "Notice of Need of ADR Phone Conference." Dkt. No. 55. Defendants Experia
More

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

On August 15, 2016, the court issued an order requiring Plaintiff and all defendants who have appeared in this action but have not filed a Notice of Settlement to meet and confer in order to reach an agreement on an ADR process and file, within 10 days, either (1) a stipulation embodying their agreement, or (2) the form entitled "Notice of Need of ADR Phone Conference." Dkt. No. 55. Defendants Experian Information Solutions, Inc. and Bank of America, N.A. have appeared in this action but have not filed Notices of Settlement. As of the date and time this was order was filed, neither these defendants nor Plaintiff have complied and the time for compliance has expired.

Accordingly, the parties are ordered to appear before the Honorable Edward J. Davila on September 15, 2016, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 1, 5th Floor, United States District Court, 280 S. First Street, San Jose, California, 95113, to show cause why the court should not impose any and all appropriate sanctions, including monetary sanctions or dismissal of this action, on the parties, or any of them, for willful disobedience of a court order.

The parties may file a response to this order demonstrating good cause why sanctions should not be imposed on or before September 8, 2016. In doing so, however, they must (1) explain their failure to comply with the original deadline to file one of the ADR forms, and (2) must also file one of the forms contemplated by the August 15th Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer