Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06758/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06758-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Fraud

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERALD ISHIHARA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

KATSUTO OUNE, et al.,

Defendants /

No. C 06-6758 MMC

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT

PREJUDICE DEFENDANTS/

COUNTERCLAIMANTS’ MOTION TO

ENFORCE SETTLEMENT; VACATING

HEARING; SETTING CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Before the Court is defendant/counterclaimant Katsuto Oune (“Oune”) and

defendant/counterclaimant Haruko Shinoda Makitani’s (“Makitani”) Motion to Enforce

Settlement, filed June 26, 2007. No opposition has been filed; however, by Notice of

Automatic Stay filed July 16, 2007, plaintiffs Gerald Ishihara and Yoshiko Ishihara

(collectively, “the Ishiharas”) informed the Court that they had filed for bankruptcy on June

25, 2007. Having reviewed the papers filed in support of the motion, and the Notice of

Automatic Stay, the Court deems the motion suitable for decision on the papers, VACATES

the hearing scheduled for July 27, 2007, and rules as follows.

The motion seeks to enforce a global settlement. In light of the Ishiharas’ having

filed for bankruptcy, however, all proceedings with respect to the counterclaims asserted

against them by Oune and Makitani are stayed. See 11 U.S.C. § 362(a). Consequently,

the Court cannot enforce a global settlement and, accordingly, the motion is hereby

Case 3:06-cv-06758-MMC Document 77 Filed 07/26/07 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

The Notice of Automatic Stay was filed herein on behalf of the Ishiharas by their

bankruptcy counsel, Peter N. Hadiaris. Unless said counsel, or any other attorney, files a

Notice of Substitution herein, however, the Ishiharas remain pro se, and must personally

participate in preparation of the Joint Case Management Conference Statement and must

personally attend the Case Management Conference.

2

The Ishiharas failed to appear at the Case Management Conference conducted on

February 9, 2007, failed to participate in the preparation of the Joint Case Management

Conference Statement filed on behalf of other parties on March 30, 2007, and failed to

participate in the preparation of the Joint Case Management Conference Statement filed on

behalf of other parties on May 25, 2007.

2

DENIED, without prejudice to any party moving to enforce any settlement as to claims

other than the counterclaims asserted against the Ishiharas.

The Court hereby schedules a Case Managment Conference for August 31, 2007, at

10:30 a.m. in Courtroom 7, at which time the Court will set a trial date for all claims alleged

herein, with the exception of the now-stayed counterclaims asserted against the Ishiharas. 

All parties shall file a Joint Case Management Statement no later than August 24, 2007, in

which, inter alia, the parties shall set forth a proposed trial date and pretrial deadlines. If

the parties have differing views on the proposed trial date and/or pretrial deadlines, they

shall set forth their differences in a single joint document.

Because the Ishiharas’ claims against defendants remain pending before this Court,

the Ishiharis are required to personally participate in the preparation of the Joint Case

Management Conference Statement and to personally appear at the August 31, 2007 Case

Management Conference.1

 If the Ishiharas fail to participate in the preparation of the Joint

Case Management Conference Statement and/or to personally appear at the August 31,

2007 Case Management Conference, the Court hereby informs the Ishiharas that in light of

their previous failures to participate and/or appear,2 the Court will impose sanctions, which

may include terminating and/or monetary sanctions, for failure to prosecute and for failure

to obey a court order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 26, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-06758-MMC Document 77 Filed 07/26/07 Page 2 of 2