Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01283/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01283-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright Infringement

---

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

CAROLINE RECORDS, INC.; VIRGIN )

RECORDS AMERICA, INC.; ARISTA )

RECORDS, LLC; UMG RECORDINGS, )

INC.; ELEKTRA ENTERTAINMENT GROUP, )

INC.; and INTERSCOPE RECORDS, )

) 2:05-cv-1283-GEB-PAN(JFM) 

Plaintiffs, )

) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v. ) AND CONTINUING STATUS

) (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

KRISTI SUBHANSEN, ) CONFERENCE

)

Defendant. )

)

The Minute Order filed on February 9, 2006, continued the

status conference in this case to June 5, 2006, and required the

parties to file a status report “fourteen days prior to the hearing.” 

No status report was filed as ordered.

Plaintiffs are Ordered to Show Cause (OSC) no later than

4:00 p.m. on June 9, 2006, why sanctions should not be imposed under

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

and/or Plaintiffs for the failure to file a timely status report, as

ordered. The written response shall state whether Plaintiffs or 

/////

/////

Case 2:05-cv-01283-GEB-EFB Document 28 Filed 05/26/06 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

“If the fault lies with the attorney, that is where the 1

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

counsel are at fault and whether a hearing is requested on the OSC.1

If a hearing is requested, it will be held on August 14, 2006, at 9:00

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

that date. Since the docket sheet indicates the only matter

remaining for decision is the default of Defendant, Plaintiffs shall

file a further status report no later than July 31, 2006, in which

they shall explain only the status of the default issue. Plaintiffs

are cautioned this action could be dismissed if Plaintiffs’ status

report does not indicate diligent prosecution of this action. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 26, 2006

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01283-GEB-EFB Document 28 Filed 05/26/06 Page 2 of 2