Elam v. Ford Motor Company

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JON ELAM, Case No. 1:24-cv-01085-JLT-SAB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PARTIES TO SHOW CAUSE IN WRITING WHY MONETARY 13 v. SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT ISSUE FOR FAILURE TO FILE JOINT SCHEDULING 14 REPORT FORD MOTOR COMPANY, 15 DEADLINE: DECEMBER 3, 2024 Defendant.

A scheduling conference is set for December 5, 2024 in this matter. (ECF No. 3.) The parties were ordered to file a joint scheduling report one full week prior to the scheduling conference. (Id. at 2.) No joint report has been filed in this action.

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 Court shall require the parties to show cause why monetary sanctions should not issue for the failure to file a joint report in compliance with order setting the mandatory | scheduling conference.

2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The parties shall show cause in writing no later than December 3, 2024 why 4 monetary sanctions should not issue for the failure to file a joint scheduling report 5 as required by the September 13, 2024 order (ECF No. 3). The parties are advised 6 that filing the untimely joint scheduling report without showing cause in writing 7 why sanctions should not issue is an insufficient response to this order; and 8 2. Failure to comply with this order will result in the issuance of sanctions.

10 IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee | Dated: _ December 2, 2024 STANLEY A. BOONE 12 United States Magistrate Judge