Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00563/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00563-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PHYLLIS L. YORK, and JAMES B. 

CARR,

Plaintiffs,

v.

AMERICAN SAVINGS NETWORK, 

INC. also known as AMERICAN 

SAVINGS NETWORK, LLC; ANTHONY 

DIEHL; and ROGER S. MORAN;

Defendants.

No. 2:15-cv-00563-GEB-DAD

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND 

CONTINUING STATUS (PRETRIAL 

SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE; FED. R. 

CIV. P. 4(M) NOTICE

The March 12, 2015 Order Setting Status (Pretrial 

Scheduling) Conference scheduled a status conference in this case 

on June 22, 2015, and required the parties to file a joint status 

report no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the scheduling 

conference. The March 12, 2015 Order further required a status 

report be filed regardless of whether a joint report could be 

procured. No status report was filed as ordered.

Therefore, Plaintiffs are Ordered to Show Cause (“OSC”) 

in a writing to be filed no later than June 19, 2015, why 

sanctions should not be imposed against them and/or their counsel 

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

failure to file a timely status report. The written response 

shall also state whether Plaintiffs or their counsel are at 

Case 2:15-cv-00563-KJM-DB Document 8 Filed 06/12/15 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

fault, and whether a hearing is requested on the OSC.1 If a 

hearing is requested, it will be held on August 31, 2015, at 9:00 

a.m., just prior to the status conference, which is rescheduled 

to that date and time. A status report shall be filed no later 

than fourteen (14) days prior to the status conference. 

Further, Plaintiffs are notified under Rule 4(m) of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that failure to serve each 

defendant with process within the 120 day period prescribed in 

that Rule may result in the unserved defendant(s) and/or this 

action being dismissed. To avoid dismissal, on or before July 13, 

2015, Plaintiffs shall file proof of service for each defendant

or a sufficient explanation why service was not completed within 

Rule 4(m)’s prescribed service period.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 11, 2015

 

1 “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.” In re 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. Myers v. Shekter (In re Hill), 775 F.2d 1385, 1387 (9th Cir. 1985).

Case 2:15-cv-00563-KJM-DB Document 8 Filed 06/12/15 Page 2 of 2