Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01244/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01244-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

As the Order states: 1

The failure of one or more of the parties to

participate in the preparation of the Joint

(continued...)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CITY LIMITS OF NORTHERN NEVADA, )

INC., a Nevada corporation; and )

DAVID A. MCKIBBIN, dba CITY )

LIMITS, )

) 2:06-cv-1244-GEB-GGH 

Plaintiffs, )

) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v. ) AND CONTINUING STATUS

) (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, a political ) CONFERENCE

subdivision of the State of )

California, )

)

Defendant. )

)

The September 1, 2006, Order Continuing Status (Pretrial

Scheduling) Conference rescheduled the status conference in this case

for November 20, 2006, and required the parties to file a joint status

report no later than November 6, 2006. The Order further required

that a status report be filed regardless of whether a joint report

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

Case 2:06-cv-01244-GEB-GGH Document 20 Filed 11/16/06 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

(...continued) 1

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

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 September 1, 2006, at 2 n.1.

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

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

Plaintiffs and Defendant are Ordered to Show Cause (OSC) no

later than 4:00 p.m. on November 27, 2006, why sanctions should not be

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

against the parties and/or their counsel for the failure to file a

timely status report, as ordered. The written response shall state

whether the parties and/or their counsel are at fault and whether a

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

be held on January 29, 2007, 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 September 1, 2006, Order, the parties

shall file a joint status report no later than January 16, 2007. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 15, 2006

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-01244-GEB-GGH Document 20 Filed 11/16/06 Page 2 of 2