Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01568/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-01568-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

----oo0oo----

WILLIAM HOPSON, and CYNTHIA 

HOPSON,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ERNIE’S GENERAL STORE, INC.; 

ERNEST GIANNECCHINI TRUST; and 

Does 1-5,

Defendants.

NO. CIV 2:13-1568 WBS DAD 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

----oo0oo----

The court has an obligation to recuse itself from any 

case in which the judge might have a “financial interest,” 

however small. 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(4). Because corporate parties 

are in the best position to identify their parent and subsidiary 

corporations, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 and this court 

require all non-governmental corporate entities to submit 

corporate disclosure statements in order to assist the court in 

carrying out its recusal obligation. In its Order Setting Status 

Case 2:13-cv-01568-WBS-KJN Document 13 Filed 11/27/13 Page 1 of 4
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

(Pretrial Scheduling) Conference issued on July 31, 2013, the 

court unequivocally instructed all non-governmental corporate 

parties to include corporate disclosures in the parties’ Joint 

Status Report:

Pursuant to Local Rule 240, the parties shall 

submit to the court a JOINT Status Report 

fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the 

hearing date, which shall contain: . . . (m) 

a statement by any nongovernmental corporate 

party identifying all of its parent and 

subsidiary corporations and listing any 

publicly held company that owns 10% or more 

of the party’s stock. If any nongovernmental 

corporate party has no parent or subsidiary 

corporations or no publicly held companies 

owning 10% or more of its stock, it shall so 

state in the Joint Status Report. 

Thereafter, if there is any change in the 

information, the party shall file and serve a 

supplemental statement within a reasonable 

time after such change occurs. 

(Docket No. 4.)

In so instructing, the court emphasized the importance 

of corporate disclosures and warned that failure to comply with 

the court’s Order could warrant sanctions:

The purpose of the corporate disclosure 

requirement in subpart (m) of this Order is 

to assist the court in carrying out this 

obligation, because corporate parties are in 

the best position to identify their parent 

and subsidiary corporations. Without this 

information, the court risks retaining a case 

in which it unknowingly has a financial 

interest. As a consequence, not only would 

the undersigned judge face public criticism, 

the public’s confidence in an impartial 

judiciary would be eroded. Failure to assist 

the court in protecting these and the other 

interests advanced by § 455(b)(4)--especially 

in the face of a clear and direct request 

from the court--amounts to sanctionable 

conduct. 

(Id.; see also id. (“Failure to comply with the requirements of 

this subpart will result in . . . sanctions being ordered against 

Case 2:13-cv-01568-WBS-KJN Document 13 Filed 11/27/13 Page 2 of 4
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

any nongovernmental corporate party that did not submit its 

corporate disclosures.”) (emphasis in original).) 

The Court also clarified that, unless the parties have 

received a Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order prior to the status 

conference, “the parties are required to attend the status 

conference as scheduled.” (Id.) The court warned that a failure 

to appear at the appropriate time will be treated as a failure to 

appear and may subject counsel to sanctions. (Id.) 

Not only has defendant Ernie’s General Store, Inc. 

(“Ernie’s”), failed to file any corporate disclosures, defendants 

failed to coordinate with plaintiffs to file a Joint Status 

Report at all. According to a declaration filed by plaintiffs’ 

counsel, (Docket No. 11-1), defendants have regularly switched 

attorneys and defendants’ current counsel of record, Michael 

Babitzke, has not communicated with plaintiffs since October 29, 

2013. Plaintiffs filed a status conference statement without 

defendants, and the court did not issue a Status (Pretrial 

Scheduling) Order prior to the status conference. 

The court then held the status conference as scheduled 

on November 25, 2013. Without explanation or warning, defendants 

and their counsel both failed to appear. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, within ten days of the 

date of this Order, defendant Ernie’s shall submit its corporate 

disclosures and either (1) pay sanctions in the amount of $150.00 

to the Clerk of the Court; or (2) submit a statement of good 

cause explaining its failure to comply with the court’s July 31, 

2013 Order. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within ten days of the date 

Case 2:13-cv-01568-WBS-KJN Document 13 Filed 11/27/13 Page 3 of 4
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

4

of this Order, defense counsel Michael Babitzke shall either (1) 

pay sanctions in the amount of $150.00 to the Clerk of the Court; 

or (2) submit a statement of good cause explaining counsel’s 

failure to appear at the November 25, 2013 status conference. 

Dated: November 26, 2013

Case 2:13-cv-01568-WBS-KJN Document 13 Filed 11/27/13 Page 4 of 4