Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-01807/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-01807-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 29:754 Discrimination

---

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

DEAN APOSTOL,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

TOM VILSACK,

Defendant(s).

_____________________________________/

No. C 09-01807 MEJ

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

 On January 13, 2010, Defendant filed three discovery dispute letters in this case. (Dkt. ##

16-18.) Upon review of the letters, the Court noted that two (Dkt. ##16-17) did not contain

Plaintiff’s position on the disputed issues, and in the third (Dkt. #18), Plaintiff requests a deadline

extension without providing any legal authority or reasoning for the request. As the letters did not

comply with the undersigned’s discovery standing order, the Court ordered Plaintiff to serve on

Defendant his portion of the joint letters by January 15, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. (Dkt. #19.) The Court

ordered Defendant to then file the joint letters by January 19, 2010. The Court warned Plaintiff that

if he failed to serve his portion of the joint letters by January 15, 2010, the Court would consider the

imposition of sanctions, including evidence exclusion.

On January 19, 2010, Defendant resubmitted the letters and stated that no response had been

received from Plaintiff. (Dkt. ##20-22.) Accordingly, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause

why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to comply with discovery obligations, as well as

his failure to comply with this Court’s January 14, 2010 Order. (Dkt. #23.) The Court ordered

Plaintiff to file a declaration by January 28, 2010, and scheduled a hearing on February 4, 2010.

The Court is now in receipt of a declaration from Plaintiff’s counsel, Arlo Uriarte, in

response to the order to show cause. (Dkt. #24.) In his declaration, Mr. Uriarte states that Plaintiff

Case 3:09-cv-01807-MEJ Document 25 Filed 01/25/10 Page 1 of 2
UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

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

2

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

suffers from a depressive order and told him that he left the United States for the Philippines because

“he needed to recuperate after spending many months in the United States.” This is unacceptable. 

Plaintiff has an obligation to vigorously prosecute his case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The vigorous

prosecution of a case does not include leaving the country for months at a time without notice to the

Court or opposing counsel. Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows:

1) The February 4, 2010 Order to Show Cause hearing is hereby VACATED.

2) Plaintiff Dean Apostol (i.e., Plaintiff himself and not his counsel) is hereby

ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this case should not be dismissed for failure to

prosecute. Plaintiff Apostol shall file a declaration by February 11, 2010, and the

Court shall conduct an order to show cause hearing on February 18, 2010 at 10:00

a.m. in Courtroom B, 15th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco,

California.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 25, 2010 _______________________________

Maria-Elena James 

Chief United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:09-cv-01807-MEJ Document 25 Filed 01/25/10 Page 2 of 2