Smith v. City of Oakland, 17-cv-06260-MEJ. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180226787
Visitors: 11
Filed: Feb. 23, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 23, 2018
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE MARIA-ELENA JAMES , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Mark Ryan Smith and/or his counsel Donald Charles Schwartz have failed to comply with numerous Court orders: 1. An initial case management conference ("CMC") was scheduled for February 1, 2018, and a joint CMC statement was due January 25, 2018. No CMC statement was filed. Dkt. No. 21. 2. On January 30, 2018, Mr. Schwartz failed to appear at a telephonic scheduling conference before Judge Sallie Kim. Dkt. No. 22. 3. Mr.
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE MARIA-ELENA JAMES , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Mark Ryan Smith and/or his counsel Donald Charles Schwartz have failed to comply with numerous Court orders: 1. An initial case management conference ("CMC") was scheduled for February 1, 2018, and a joint CMC statement was due January 25, 2018. No CMC statement was filed. Dkt. No. 21. 2. On January 30, 2018, Mr. Schwartz failed to appear at a telephonic scheduling conference before Judge Sallie Kim. Dkt. No. 22. 3. Mr. ..
More
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
MARIA-ELENA JAMES, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Mark Ryan Smith and/or his counsel Donald Charles Schwartz have failed to comply with numerous Court orders:
1. An initial case management conference ("CMC") was scheduled for February 1, 2018, and a joint CMC statement was due January 25, 2018. No CMC statement was filed. Dkt. No. 21.
2. On January 30, 2018, Mr. Schwartz failed to appear at a telephonic scheduling conference before Judge Sallie Kim. Dkt. No. 22.
3. Mr. Schwartz did not respond to Judge Kim's Order to Show Cause (Dkt. No. 23), causing Judge Kim to impose monetary sanctions on him personally (Dkt. No. 27).
4. Mr. Schwartz did not appear at the February 23, 2018 telephonic scheduling conference before Judge Kim. Dkt. No. 28.
5. The Court denied the parties' stipulation to stay proceedings pending a settlement conference "[g]iven Plaintiff's counsel's failure thus far to participate in the settlement process[.]" Dkt. No. 26 at 1. The Court rescheduled the initial CMC for March 1, 2018 and ordered the parties to file a joint CMC statement by February 22, 2018. Id. As of the date of this Order, no CMC statement has been filed. See Docket.
The Court VACATES the March 1, 2018 CMC. In light of Plaintiff's repeated noncompliance with Court orders and deadlines, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court deadlines. Plaintiff shall file a declaration by March 2, 2018. Notice is hereby provided that failure to file a written response will be deemed an admission that Plaintiff does not intend to prosecute. Sanctions, including but not limited to dismissal of the case without prejudice and/or monetary sanctions, may be imposed against Plaintiff and/or his counsel personally. Thus, it is imperative that the Court receive a written response by the deadline above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
