Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00633/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00633-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Job Discrimination (Race)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LASHAWN BAREFIELD, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE )

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, )

BAKERSFIELD, JIM GEORGE, )

DIANE HENDRICKSON, )

MARK MURIE, DOES 1 through 50, )

inclusive )

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

CASE NO. CV-F-05-00633 AWI/

TAG

SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER TO

RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS’

OBJECTIONS AND

SUPPLEMENTAL

OBJECTIONS TO

PLAINTIFF’S EVIDENCE

On July 6, 2007, this Court ordered Plaintiff to respond to Defendants’ objections and

supplemental objections to evidence Plaintiff filed in support of her opposition to Defendants’

motion for summary judgment. As this Court’s order noted, Defendants’ objections were filed

on June 4 and 11, respectively. Plaintiff filed her timely response on July 13. Plaintiff’s

response, however, failed to address any of Defendants’ June 4 objections, in particular

Defendants’ objections to Exhibits F-EE of the Declaration of Waukeen McCoy. Plaintiff is on

notice that failure to reply to any of Defendants’ objections will be deemed as Plaintiff’s

acquiescence to those objections and may result in exclusion of evidence.

Additionally, this Court is deeply troubled by Plaintiff’s counsel’s inattention to an order

Case 1:05-cv-00633-AWI-TAG Document 100 Filed 07/17/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

issued by this Court and by counsel’s repeated failure to follow the local rules of this district. 

Plaintiff’s counsel is admonished that this Court expects all counsel appearing before it to be

familiar with and comply with the local rules of this district. Plaintiff’s counsel is further

admonished that this Court expects all counsel to review carefully orders issued by this Court. 

Failure to do so may be cause for sanctions. See Local Rule 11-110 (“Failure of counsel or of

any 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 authorized by statute or Rule or within the

inherent power of the Court.”). 

Plaintiff is ordered to file a response to all of Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s

evidence. Plaintiff must file her responses by 4 p.m. on July 19, 2007.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff respond to all of Defendants’

objections and supplemental objections to Plaintiff’s evidence. Plaintiff’s response must be filed

by 4 p.m. on July 19, 2007. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 14, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00633-AWI-TAG Document 100 Filed 07/17/07 Page 2 of 2