Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01208/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01208-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Race)

---

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

 JAVIER RAIGOZA )

) 2:04-cv-1208-GEB-KJM 

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v. ) AND CONTINUING STATUS

) (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

ARAMARK CORPORATION; ARAMARK ) CONFERENCE

UNIFORM AND CAREER APPAREL GROUP, )

INC.; MICHAEL BRODEUR; BILL )

VERVALIN; KERM HANSEN; JACOB )

VERVALIN, )

)

Defendants. )

)

By order filed November 30, 2005, a final pretrial

conference was scheduled in this case for January 9, 2006. The

parties were required to file a joint pretrial statement no later than

January 3, 2006. (November 30 Order at 3.) Defendant timely filed a

document on January 3 titled “Joint Pretrial Statement” and a

declaration. In his declaration, defense counsel explained why

plaintiff’s counsel’s signature did not appear on this document. The

Clerk’s Office issued a notice to the parties on January 4, 2006,

instructing them to re-submit the document with both attorney’s

signatures. Plaintiff responded to that notice at 10:31 p.m. on

January 4, 2006. This response indicates that plaintiff did not

authorize defendant to file a joint pretrial statement on plaintiff’s

behalf. Due to the parties’ failure to timely file a genuine joint

Case 2:04-cv-01208-GEB -KJM Document 98 Filed 01/05/06 Page 1 of 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

1 “If the fault lies with the attorney, that is where the

impact of sanction should be lodged. If the fault lies with the

clients, that is where the impact of the sanction should be

lodged.” Matter of Sanction of Baker, 744 F.2d 1438, 1442 (10th

Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1014 (1985). Sometimes the

faults of attorneys, and their consequences, are visited upon

clients. In re Hill, 775 F.2d 1385, 1387 (9th Cir. 1985).

2

pretrial statement as ordered, the final pretrial conference is reset

to February 13, 2006 at 2:30 p.m. The parties must file a joint

pretrial statement no later than 4:00 p.m. on January 23, 2006.

Further, each party and counsel are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE

(OSC), in a written statement required to be filed not later than

January 23, 2006, why sanctions should not be imposed against each

party and/or counsel under Rule 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure because of the failure to file a joint pretrial statement. 

The written responses shall state whether a party or counsel is at

fault and whether a hearing is requested on the OSC.1 If a hearing is

requested, the OSC will be heard at 2:30 p.m. on February 13, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 5, 2006

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01208-GEB -KJM Document 98 Filed 01/05/06 Page 2 of 2