MCM CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC v. SATICOY BAY LLC SERIES 6684 CORONADO CREST, 2:15-cv-01154-JCM-GWF. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20170828b26
Visitors: 8
Filed: Aug. 23, 2017
Latest Update: Aug. 23, 2017
Summary: ORDER GEORGE FOLEY, Jr. , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the Court on the parties' failure to file a joint pretrial order required by LR 26-1(b)(5). The Scheduling Order (ECF No. 38) filed on October 9, 2015, required the parties to file a joint pretrial order required by LR 26-1(b)(5) no later than April 1, 2016, or 30 days after a decision on the dispositive motions. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was decided on July 20, 2017, in which case the date for filing the join
Summary: ORDER GEORGE FOLEY, Jr. , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the Court on the parties' failure to file a joint pretrial order required by LR 26-1(b)(5). The Scheduling Order (ECF No. 38) filed on October 9, 2015, required the parties to file a joint pretrial order required by LR 26-1(b)(5) no later than April 1, 2016, or 30 days after a decision on the dispositive motions. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was decided on July 20, 2017, in which case the date for filing the joint..
More
ORDER
GEORGE FOLEY, Jr., Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the parties' failure to file a joint pretrial order required by LR 26-1(b)(5). The Scheduling Order (ECF No. 38) filed on October 9, 2015, required the parties to file a joint pretrial order required by LR 26-1(b)(5) no later than April 1, 2016, or 30 days after a decision on the dispositive motions. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was decided on July 20, 2017, in which case the date for filing the joint pretrial order was suspended until 30 days after that decision. There are no further dispositive motions pending. To date, the parties have not complied. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that
1. Counsel for the parties shall file a joint pretrial order which fully complies with the requirements of LR 16-3 and LR 16-4 no later than September 1, 2017. Failure to timely comply will result in the imposition of sanctions up to and including a recommendation to the District Judge that the complaint be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
2. The disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) and any objections thereto shall be included in the pretrial order.
Source: Leagle
