Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00801/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00801-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
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

As the Order states: 1

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

EDYTHE KAGAN, )

) 2:06-cv-801-GEB-PAN(JFM) 

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v. ) AND CONTINUING STATUS

) (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

CONSECO SENIOR HEALTH INSURANCE ) CONFERENCE

CO., )

)

Defendant. )

)

The April 13, 2006, Order Setting Status (Pretrial

Scheduling) Conference (“April 13 Order”) scheduled a status

conference in this case for July 17, 2006, 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. The parties filed a Stipulation and Proposed Order on 1

Case 2:06-cv-00801-GEB-EFB Document 27 Filed 07/06/06 Page 1 of 3
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

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 April 13, 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

June 29, 2006, in which they request “to continue the Pretrial

Scheduling Conference from July 17, 2006[,] to August 7, 2006[,]”

because both parties “are scheduled to appear at a hearing [in a

different matter].” The “[Proposed] Order” portion of the parties’

Stipulation has not been signed. No status report was filed.

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

later than 4:00 p.m. on July 14, 2006, why sanctions should not be

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

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

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

the parties or counsel are at fault and whether a hearing is requested

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

September 25, 2006, at 9:00 a.m., just prior to the status conference,

which is rescheduled to that date. In accordance with the 

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:06-cv-00801-GEB-EFB Document 27 Filed 07/06/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

requirements set forth in the April 13 Order, the parties are to file

a joint status report no later than September 11, 2006. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 6, 2006

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00801-GEB-EFB Document 27 Filed 07/06/06 Page 3 of 3