Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00523/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00523-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SCOTT JOHNSON,

NO. CIV. S-05-523 LKK/GGH

Plaintiff,

v. O R D E R

SUCA INVESTMENTS, INC., a

Hawaii corporation; and 

WORLD OF GOOD TASTES, INC.,

Defendant.

 /

A Status Conference was set for May 31, 2005 in the abovecaptioned case. Neither party filed status reports as required by

the court’s Order Setting Status Conference. On May 25, 2005, the

court ordered the parties to show cause why sanctions should not

issue for their failure to timely file status reports.

The court is in receipt of defendant World of Good Tastes,

Inc.’s response. Defendant explains that it did not file a status

report because it was never served with the order setting status,

so did not have notice of the conference or the deadline for the

Case 2:05-cv-00523-LKK -GGH Document 14 Filed 06/13/05 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

1 Defendant also explains that it had not yet appeared when

the Status Report was due and that plaintiff has now dismissed the

case. The court admonishes counsel that although it had not

appeared, it was still required to comply with the court’s order

to show cause. Furthermore, the court docket reflects that the

case was dismissed subsequent to the status, thus the dismissal

does not bear on the requirement to file a status report.

2

status report.1

The court is also in receipt of plaintiff’s response. 

Plaintiff states that he did not file a report due to an oversight

in reviewing the order setting status conference and that he was

hospitalized and bedridden during the week the report was due.

While the court does not find it appropriate to sanction plaintiff

in this instance, the court reminds plaintiff that under Fed. R.

Civ. P. 6, it may have been appropriate to request an extension to

file the Status Report. Such an extension would have allowed

plaintiff to avoid violating the court’s order, which will be

viewed with much less tolerance hereinafter.

The court hereby DISCHARGES the order to show cause filed on

May 25, 2005. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: June 13, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:05-cv-00523-LKK -GGH Document 14 Filed 06/13/05 Page 2 of 2