Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01745/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01745-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 490
Nature of Suit: Cable/ Satellite TV
Cause of Action: 47:553 Unauthorized Reception of Cable Service

---

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On August 26, 2024, the Court conducted the final pretrial conference. Thomas Riley appeared 

as counsel for plaintiff, but the defendant did not appear as ordered. The defendant also failed to 

comply with the requirements of Local Rule 281 to cooperate in the drafting of a joint pretrial 

conference statement (Doc. 69 at 57-60). Consequently, the defendant has identified no witnesses or 

exhibits he intends to present at trial. 

When setting the pretrial conference, the Court emphasized:

The parties are advised that the failure to file a pretrial statement may result in 

the imposition of appropriate sanctions, which may include the preclusion of any 

and all witnesses, dismissal of the action, or entry of default.

(Doc. 68 at 2) The defendant was present when the Court set the conference and was served 

with a copy of the order setting the conference and a copy of the Court’s Local Rule 281, 

which detailed the parties’ obligations related to the pretrial conference. Nevertheless, the 

G & G CLOSED CIRCUIT EVENTS, LLC,

 Plaintiff,

v.

OSCAR DORADO AGUILAR,

Defendant.

Case No.: 1:20-cv-01745 JLT BAM

ORDER TO OSCAR DORADO AGUILAR TO 

SHOW CAUSE WHY HIS ANSWER SHOULD 

NOT BE STRICKEN FOR HIS FAILURE TO 

COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S ORDERS

Case 1:20-cv-01745-JLT-BAM Document 72 Filed 08/27/24 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

defendant failed to comply1. Thus, the Court ORDERS:

1. Within 21 days, the defendant SHALL show cause in writing why sanctions 

should not be imposed, up to and including striking his answer and entering default,

for his failure to comply with the Court’s orders. The defendant’s failure to respond 

will result in the Court striking his answer and entering default.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 27, 2024 

1 The Court recognizes that the defendant reported to his opposing counsel that he was “looking for someone to 

help [him] out” (Doc. 69 at 60), he has made no effort to seek an extension of time with the Court, or to explain 

why he has delayed in seeking replacement counsel. The defendant’s attorney withdrew from his representation 

more than six months ago (Docs. 48, 55). The Court set the pretrial conference more than three months ago

(Doc. 68).

Case 1:20-cv-01745-JLT-BAM Document 72 Filed 08/27/24 Page 2 of 2