ORDER REQUIRING THE PARTIES TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT ISSUE FOR THE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDER SETTING THE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

SHEILA K. OBERTO, Magistrate Judge.

A settlement conference in this action is set for July 17, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. before the undersigned. (Docs. 57, 58.) Pursuant to the order setting the settlement conference, the parties were required to submit a confidential settlement statement to the Court five (5) business days prior to the conference date. (Doc. 58.) On July 11, 2018, the Court issued a minute order stating that although the docket indicated Plaintiff had "filed" his settlement conference statement (see Docs. 59 & 60), it had not been received by the Court, and no statement had been received from Defendants. (Doc. 61.) The parties were ordered to submit their confidential statements by no later than 12:00 p.m. on July 12, 2018. (Doc. 61.)

The Court received Plaintiff's confidential statement on July 11, 2018. The statement does not comply with the requirements set forth in the Order setting the settlement conference. (see Doc. 58 at 2.) Specifically, Plaintiff failed to provide a meaningful summary of the proceedings to date. Further, Plaintiff failed to properly outline past settlement efforts or provide the court with his settlement demand, despite a reference to an "attached" document, which was not provided to the Court. (Id.)

Defendants failed to meet the Court's deadline to submit their confidential statement by 12:00 p.m. on July 12, 2018. Instead, the Court received Defendants' statement at 3:37 p.m. after the Court contacted Defendants' counsel. As a result of Defendants' failure to comply with the Courts' order, the parties have not had adequate time to meet and confer.

This Court spends considerable time preparing for settlement conference so as to make it meaningful to the parties and results in a greater likelihood of settlement success. Settlement is extremely important in this district where the judges have one of the highest caseloads per judge in the United States. The settlement conference statement assists the Court in adequately preparing for these matters. They are not pro forma.

Local Rule 110 provides that "[f]ailure 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. . . within the inherent power of the Court." The Court has the inherent power to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000).

The parties are required to show cause why sanctions should not be issued for the failure to submit their confidential statement in compliance with the May 29, 2018 order setting the settlement conference.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that by 3:00 p.m. on July 13, 2018:

IT IS SO ORDERED.