Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01939/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01939-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 950
Nature of Suit: Constitutionality of State Statutes
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination

---

1

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On November 7, 2014, Defendant BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Los Angeles 

(“Defendant”) filed a motion for civil contempt sanctions and an application for an order to show 

cause why third-party witness Mario Valdez (“Mr. Valdez”) should not be held in civil contempt for 

failure to appear at his October 21, 2014 deposition pursuant to subpoena. The matter was referred to 

United States Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 

Rule 302. 

On November 25, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued an Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) why 

Mr. Valdez should not be held in civil contempt for failing to comply with a Court order to appear at 

his deposition. (Doc. 52). A hearing regarding the OSC was held on December 19, 2014 at 9:00 am. 

Non-party, Mario Valdez, appeared in person.

MAURICE J. CURTIS,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

BCI COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES 

BOTTLING COMPANIES, 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.:1:13-cv-1939 AWI-BAM 

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

(ECF No. 64)

Case 1:13-cv-01939-AWI-BAM Document 68 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 2
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

On December 22, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations that the 

motion for civil contempt sanctions be DENIED. (ECF No. 64.) The Findings and Recommendations 

were served on all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fifteen (15) 

days of the date of service. To date, no party has filed objections to the findings and 

recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de 

novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds the Findings and 

Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued December 22, 2014, are adopted in 

full.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 12, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01939-AWI-BAM Document 68 Filed 01/12/15 Page 2 of 2