Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02522/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02522-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GUY JONES, 

NO. CIV. S-06-2522 LKK KJM

Plaintiff,

v. O R D E R

MOUNTAIN MIKE’S PIZZA, et al,

Defendants.

 /

On February 20, 2007, the court sanctioned Mr. Christopher Lee

(counsel for defendants Mountain Mike’s Pizza, Sukhwinder Kahlon,

and Ranjit Kahlon) in connection with his failure to appear at the

status conference on February 26, 2007. Initially, when the court

ordered counsel to show cause why sanctions should not issue, a

response was filed by Mr. Stephen Mackey, a business associate of

Mr. Lee’s who had attempted to make a special appearance at the

status conference in Mr. Lee’s place. Mr. Mackey informed the

court that Mr. Lee had informed him that the conference was to be

held on February 26, 2007 (the correct date) at 3:00 p.m. (the

Case 2:06-cv-02522-LKK -KJM Document 21 Filed 03/26/07 Page 1 of 3
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

2

incorrect time).

The court is now in receipt of Mr. Lee’s declaration, which

states that he sent out a notice of unavailability covering the

date of the status conference. Mr. Lee was out of the country

during those dates with his wife, who is ill. Although counsel has

not expressly stated as much, it appears that the purpose of the

filing is to convince the court to relieve counsel of the $150

sanction and the order to pay counsel for plaintiffs $1,210.

This is unavailing for several reasons. First, Mr. Lee filed

his declaration after the court already provided ample time for a

response to the order to show cause. That order was issued on

February 28, 2007 and did not require a response until March 16,

2007, well after the close of counsel’s period of unavailability

(March 4, 2007). Instead of personally filing a response, Mr. Lee

had his associate, Mr. Mackey, file one. Only after sanctions were

issued did Mr. Lee choose to file a declaration. The declaration

is a day late and a dollar short.

Second, Mr. Lee claims that because of the period of

unavailability, “no one was able to monitor the e-mail for the

rescheduling of the status conference.” Mr. Lee’s period of

unavailability did not commence until February 15, 2007. The

rescheduling of the status conference occurred on January 24, 2007.

Mr. Lee’s claim that he did not know that the status conference was

moved is entirely contradicted by the fact that he (and his

business associate, Mr. Mackey) knew of the rescheduled date (moved

from February 20, 2007 to February 26, 2007). Apparently, Mr. Lee

Case 2:06-cv-02522-LKK -KJM Document 21 Filed 03/26/07 Page 2 of 3
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

3

received notice of the rescheduled date but would have the court

believe that he did not receive notice of the rescheduled time

(moved from 3:00 p.m. to 11:30 a.m.).

Third, Mr. Lee could have either filed a notice of

unavailability with the court or requested a continuance of the

status conference -- but he did neither of these things.

Furthermore, when Mr. Lee requested that Mr. Mackey make a special

appearance on his behalf, it was his duty to inform Mr. Mackey of

the correct date and time of the status conference. Mr. Lee failed

to do so.

The March 20, 2007 order imposing sanctions and requiring Mr.

Lee to pay $1,210 to counsel for plaintiffs is confirmed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 23, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-02522-LKK -KJM Document 21 Filed 03/26/07 Page 3 of 3