Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04225/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-04225-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ILWU-PMA WELFARE PLAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SHARAM BORJKHANI, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-04225-HSG 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE 

COURT SHOULD NOT SANCTION 

COUNSEL FOR FAILURE TO SERVE 

INITIAL DISCLOSURES AND NONCOMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULES

On March 15, 2016, the Court held a further case management conference in this matter. 

See Dkt. No. 62. At that conference, counsel for Plaintiff ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan informed the 

Court that counsel for Defendants Sharam Borjkhani and Salimeh Mirmotahari never served initial 

disclosures in this matter as required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a). 

“If a party fails to provide information or identify a witness as required by Rule 26(a) or 

(e), the party is not allowed to use that information or witness to supply evidence on a motion, at a 

hearing, or at a trial, unless the failure was substantially justified or is harmless.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 

37(c)(1). The Court may also, after giving the offending party an opportunity to be heard, order 

payment of the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, caused by the failure. Id.

At the March 15 conference, the Court also noted that defense counsel failed to file a joint 

case management statement as required under Civil Local Rule 16-10(d). The Court has the 

authority to issue sanctions for noncompliance with local rules. Civ. L.R. 1-4.

The Court hereby ORDERS Defendants to show cause why the Court should not sanction 

defense counsel Bob Khakshooy for failing to serve initial disclosures in this case and for failing 

to file a joint case management statement. Counsel must file a statement of three pages or less by 

Case 4:15-cv-04225-HSG Document 63 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

March 25, 2016, that responds to this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 18, 2016

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 4:15-cv-04225-HSG Document 63 Filed 03/18/16 Page 2 of 2