Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00980/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00980-0/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

27

28

As the May 5 Order states: 1

The failure of one or more of the parties to

participate in the preparation of the Joint

Status Report does not excuse the other

parties from their obligation to timely file

(continued...)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SCOTT N. JOHNSON, )

) 2:06-cv-980-GEB-GGH 

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v. ) AND CONTINUING STATUS

) (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

JARA, a general partnership; ) CONFERENCE

RODEMANN’S COLLISION REPAIR, )

INC., individually and d/b/a )

Rodemann’s Collision Repair; and )

DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, )

)

Defendants. )

)

The May 5, 2006, Order Setting Status (Pretrial Scheduling)

Conference (“May 5 Order”) scheduled a status conference in this case

for August 28, 2006, and required the parties to file a joint status

report no later than fourteen days prior to the scheduling conference. 

The May 5 Order further required that a status report be filed

regardless of whether a joint report could be procured. Plaintiff 1

Case 2:06-cv-00980-GEB-GGH Document 9 Filed 08/17/06 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

27

28

(...continued) 1

a status report in accordance with this

Order. In the event a party fails to

participate as ordered, the party timely

submitting the status report shall include a

declaration explaining why it was unable to

obtain the cooperation of the other party or

parties. 

Order filed May 5, 2006, at 2 n. 1.

2

filed an individual status report on August 15, 2006, which was

untimely.

Plaintiff’s Status Report states that “[a]ll named parties

have been served, but have not answered.” (Pl.’s Status Report at 2.) 

Nevertheless, Plaintiff’s Status Report indicates that this action may

be fully scheduled. Plaintiff has not shown that the schedule he

proposes should be adopted because Plaintiff has not demonstrated that

he is authorized to litigate this action other than by way of default

proceedings. Plaintiff’s Status Report is devoid of any discussion of

default proceedings. Since Plaintiff has not shown that he may

litigate this action apart from compliance with default procedures,

the Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference set for August 28, 2006,

is rescheduled for November 6, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. Plaintiff shall

file a further status report no later than October 23, 2006, in which

he explains why this action should not be dismissed for his failure to

properly prosecute it or, in the alternative, how and when the action

will be properly prosecuted. 

Furthermore, Plaintiff is Ordered to Show Cause (OSC) no

later than 4:00 p.m. on August 23, 2006, why sanctions should not be

imposed under Rule 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

against him for the failure to file a timely status report, as

ordered. The written response shall state whether a hearing is

Case 2:06-cv-00980-GEB-GGH Document 9 Filed 08/17/06 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

27

28

3

requested on the OSC. If a hearing is requested, it will be held on

November 6, 2006, just prior to the status conference. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 16, 2006

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00980-GEB-GGH Document 9 Filed 08/17/06 Page 3 of 3