Filed: Mar. 20, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 20, 2017
Summary: ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST TO APPEAR TELEPHONICALLY AT MARCH 21, 2017 STATUS CONFERENCE (ECF No. 20) STANLEY A. BOONE , Magistrate Judge . On December 20, 2016, an order issued setting the initial scheduling conference in this action for March 21, 2017. On March 7, 2017, Plaintiffs were ordered to file a notice of status of service within five days. The parties were advised that since all defendants had not been served the Court was concerned that it would not serve the interest of
Summary: ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST TO APPEAR TELEPHONICALLY AT MARCH 21, 2017 STATUS CONFERENCE (ECF No. 20) STANLEY A. BOONE , Magistrate Judge . On December 20, 2016, an order issued setting the initial scheduling conference in this action for March 21, 2017. On March 7, 2017, Plaintiffs were ordered to file a notice of status of service within five days. The parties were advised that since all defendants had not been served the Court was concerned that it would not serve the interest of j..
More
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST TO APPEAR TELEPHONICALLY AT MARCH 21, 2017 STATUS CONFERENCE
(ECF No. 20)
STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.
On December 20, 2016, an order issued setting the initial scheduling conference in this action for March 21, 2017. On March 7, 2017, Plaintiffs were ordered to file a notice of status of service within five days. The parties were advised that since all defendants had not been served the Court was concerned that it would not serve the interest of judicial economy to hold the mandatory scheduling conference. Plaintiffs did not respond to the March 7, 2017 order.
On March 15, 2017, an order issued requiring Plaintiff to show cause why sanctions should not issue for the failure to comply with the March 7, 2017 order, and the scheduling conference was converted to a status conference. On March 15, 2015, the parties filed a joint status report and Plaintiffs filed a request to appear telephonically at the March 21, 2017 hearing. Plaintiffs' response to the order to show cause was due March 17, 2017. Plaintiffs did not file a response to the order to show cause.
The court has twice now issued an order requiring Plaintiffs to respond and Plaintiffs have not complied. The Court shall provide Plaintiffs with one final opportunity to comply with the order to show cause. If Plaintiffs do not file a response to the order to show cause by 2:00 p.m. on Monday, March 20, 2017, counsel shall be required to personally appear at the March 21, 2017 status conference.
Further, it appears clear that Plaintiffs' counsel is not reading the orders issued in this action. As was advised in the March 15, 2017 order, the Court does not require a written request to appear telephonically. The parties shall refer to the Court's standard information which can be found at the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California's website (http://www.caed.uscourts.gov) under Judges; United States Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone (SAB). In the area entitled "Case Management Procedures," there is a link to "Standard Information." The procedure for requesting a telephonic appearance is set out at paragraph 5.
If Plaintiffs file a timely response in compliance with this order they may thereafter contact the courtroom deputy and based upon the adequacy of the response, the Court will reconsider allowing counsel to appear telephonically at the March 21, 2017 status conference.
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that by 2:00 p.m. on Monday March 20, 2017, Plaintiffs shall show cause in writing why sanctions should not issue for the failure to comply with the March 7, 2017 order of this Court. If Plaintiffs do not file a timely response in compliance with this order, Plaintiffs' counsel shall personally appear before the undersigned on March 21, 2017 at 9:15 a.m. in Courtroom 9.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
