Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00999/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-00999-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 385
Nature of Suit: Property Damage - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Property Damage

---

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

ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEERE & COMPANY, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:24-cv-00999-JLT-EPG

ORDER FOR ATTORNEY DOW TO SHOW 

CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT 

ISSUE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH 

COURT ORDER TO ATTEND THE 

MANDATORY SCHEDULING 

CONFERENCE 

(ECF No. 2)

On August 23, 2024, the Court issued an order setting a mandatory scheduling conference 

for December 10, 2024. (ECF No. 2). The order warned as follows: “Should counsel or a party 

appearing pro se fail to appear at the Mandatory Scheduling Conference . . . an ex parte hearing 

may be held and contempt sanctions, including monetary sanctions, dismissal, default, or other 

appropriate judgment, may be imposed and/or ordered.” (Id. at 6). 

On November 26, 2024, the parties filed a joint scheduling report that acknowledged the 

date and time of the conference.1(ECF No. 7). The Court held the conference as scheduled and 

counsel for all parties appeared—except for Defendant Papé Machinery, Inc. The Court’s 

courtroom deputy tried to reach counsel but was unsuccessful. Accordingly, the Court issued the 

case schedule in counsel’s absence, noting that it would issue an order to show cause due to 

counsel’s failure to appear. 

1 This report is signed by attorney Christopher Dow on behalf of Defendant Papé Machinery, Inc.

Case 1:24-cv-00999-JLT-EPG Document 11 Filed 12/11/24 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

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. Attorney Christopher Dow, counsel for Defendant Papé Machinery, Inc., shall show cause 

why sanctions should not issue for counsel’s failure to attend the conference as required 

by the Court’s order. (ECF No. 2).

2. Attorney Dow has fourteen days from the entry of this order to file a written response 

explaining why counsel did not attend the conference.

3. After reviewing counsel’s response, the Court will further consider whether sanctions are 

appropriate.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 10, 2024 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-00999-JLT-EPG Document 11 Filed 12/11/24 Page 2 of 2