Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02582/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02582-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury

---

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NATHANIEL WEISKIRCHER et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.,

Defendant.

No. 2:19–cv–2582–JAM–KJN

SANCTIONS ORDER &

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

(ECF Nos. 19 & 23)

On December 4, 2020, the court granted defendant’s motion to compel discovery from 

plaintiffs (ECF No. 19) and ordered plaintiffs’ counsel, Robert A. Heintz, to show cause within 

14 days why monetary sanctions should not follow both for his failure to participate in preparing 

a joint statement of the discovery disagreement, and for failing to appear at the hearing on the 

motion to compel. (ECF No. 23.) That deadline has passed without a response from Mr. Heintz. 

Consequently, the court finds it appropriate to impose a monetary fine of $500.00 on Mr. Heintz

personally, which is to be paid within 15 days of this order. See E.D. Cal. R. 110 (“Failure of 

counsel . . . to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for 

imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.”); 

Thompson v. Hous. Auth. of City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986) (per curiam) 

(district courts have inherent power to control their dockets and may impose sanctions in 

exercising that power). Greater sanctions, up to and including dismissal of the action with 

///

Case 2:19-cv-02582-JAM-KJN Document 24 Filed 12/16/20 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

2

prejudice, will follow if Mr. Heintz fails to timely pay the fine or respond to the instant show 

cause order.

The court also reserves the right to impose further sanctions, up to and including dismissal 

of the action with prejudice, if plaintiffs do not comply with the court’s December 3, 2020 order 

compelling various document production and amended discovery responses. (See ECF No. 23 

at 6.) Under the terms of that order, the document production and amended interrogatory answers 

at issue are due to defendant by December 28, 2020, and plaintiffs’ medical release authorizations 

were due to defendant on December 10, 2020. (Id.) Should these deadlines also pass without 

compliance, the court will entertain defendant’s motion for sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 37(b)(2) for failure to obey the court’s discovery order. Such sanctions may include 

awarding defense counsel the cost of bringing the motion to compel as well as recommending that 

this case be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with the federal rules and the court’s 

orders.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Within 15 days of the entry of this order, plaintiffs’ counsel, Robert A. Heintz, shall:

a. Personally pay the Clerk of Court a monetary fine of $500.00; 

b. Show cause, in writing, why the court should not impose further sanctions, up to 

and including dismissal of the case with prejudice, for failure to comply with the 

federal rules and the court’s orders and for failure to prosecute the case; and

c. Send a copy of this order to his clients and advise the court that he has done so.

2. Failure to comply with this order will result in the imposition of further sanctions up to 

and including dismissal of the action with prejudice, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure 37(b)(2) and 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 16, 2020

weis.2582

Case 2:19-cv-02582-JAM-KJN Document 24 Filed 12/16/20 Page 2 of 2