Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01064/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01064-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract

---

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

1 As the Order states:

The failure of one or more of the parties to

participate in the preparation of the Joint

Status Report does not excuse the other

parties from their obligation to timely file

a status report in accordance with this

Order. In the event a party fails to

(continued...)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRUCE L. SPCEKERT, )

) 2:05-cv-01064-GEB-GGH

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v. ) AND CONTINUING STATUS

) (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

OLD UNITED CASUALTY COMPANY, a ) CONFERENCE

Kansas corporation dba VANTAGE )

CASUALTY COMPANY; WORLDWIDE )

MARINE UNDERWRITERS, INC., a )

Michigan corporation; ROBERT )

CHARLES LUELLEN, an individual; )

and DOES -10, inclusive, )

)

Defendants. )

)

The May 27, 2005, Setting Status (Pretrial Scheduling)

Conference scheduled a status conference in this case for August 22,

2005, and required the parties to file a joint status report no later

than fourteen days prior to the scheduling conference. The Order

further required that a status report be filed regardless of whether a

joint report could be procured.1 No status report was filed as

Case 2:05-cv-01064-GEB-GGH Document 6 Filed 08/15/05 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

1(...continued)

participate as ordered, the party timely

submitting the status report shall include a

declaration explaining why it was unable to

obtain the cooperation of the other party or

parties. 

Order filed May 27, 2005, at 2 n. 1.

2 “If the fault lies with the attorney, that is where the

impact of sanction should be lodged. If the fault lies with the

clients, that is where the impact of the sanction should be

lodged.” Matter of Sanction of Baker, 744 F.2d 1438, 1442 (10th

Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1014 (1985). Sometimes the

faults of attorneys, and their consequences, are visited upon

clients. In re Hill, 775 F.2d 1385, 1387 (9th Cir. 1985).

2

ordered.

Plaintiff is Ordered to Show Cause (OSC) no later than

4:00 p.m. on September 6, 2005, why sanctions should not be imposed

under Rule 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure against

counsel and/or Plaintiff for the failure to file a timely status

report, as ordered. The written response shall state whether

Plaintiff or his counsel is at fault and whether a hearing is

requested on the OSC.2 If a hearing is requested, it will be held on

September 19, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., just prior to the status conference,

which is rescheduled to that date. In accordance with the

requirements set forth in the May 27 Order, the parties are to file a

joint status report no later than September 6, 2005. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 12, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge 

Case 2:05-cv-01064-GEB-GGH Document 6 Filed 08/15/05 Page 2 of 2