Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-03955/USCOURTS-cand-4_14-cv-03955-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 490
Nature of Suit: Cable/ Satellite TV
Cause of Action: 47:553 Communications Act of 1994

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SANTANA SALDIVAR LUNA, ET AL.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-03955-YGR 

ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT

CONFERENCE; SETTING COMPLIANCE 

HEARING

A Case Management Conference (“CMC”) in the above-captioned action is scheduled for 

March 14, 2016 at 2 p.m. Pursuant to the Court’s Standing Order in Civil Cases, a joint CMC 

statement was due on March 7, 2016. On that date, defendants filed a separate statement 

indicating “Defendants’ counsel attempted to contact Plaintiff’s counsel to propose a joint 

statement, including sending a draft joint statement, but no reply was received.” (Dkt. No. 14 at 

1.) The next day, on March 8, 2016, plaintiff filed a CMC statement that did not address this 

failure. (Dkt. No. 15.) Plaintiff also filed a request for telephonic appearance at the CMC in light 

of counsel’s geographic location and other case conflicts. (Dkt. No. 16.)

The Court has reviewed the parties’ joint CMC statement and the pleadings in this action 

and hereby CONTINUES the Case Management Conference to March 28, 2016 at 2 p.m. so that 

the parties can determine whether consent to a magistrate judge of their choice and for all 

purposes is warranted. The Northern District’s use of magistrate judges for all purposes has been 

hailed as the model for the United States. 

In this regard, counsel shall personally review each magistrate judge’s profile and discuss 

the option with both opposing counsel and their clients. Profiles of each magistrate judge and 

their respective locations can be found at: http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. The Court 

hereby SETS a compliance hearing on March 25, 2016 at 9:01 a.m. in the Federal Courthouse, 

1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California, Courtroom 1. Counsel shall confirm compliance as 

follows: five (5) business days prior to the date of the compliance hearing, the parties shall file 

either: (1) a joint stipulation to a magistrate judge for all purposes, or (2) a joint statement 

Case 4:14-cv-03955-YGR Document 17 Filed 03/10/16 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

verifying counsel have personally reviewed each magistrate judge’s profile and have discussed the 

options as directed but have been unable to reach consensus. If compliance is complete, the 

parties need not appear and the compliance hearing will be taken off calendar. Failure to file the 

required joint filing may result in sanctions. If the parties have not stipulated to a magistrate 

judge, the CMC will proceed before the undersigned as scheduled herein.

In light of the foregoing, the request for a telephonic appearance is DENIED as moot. The 

Court notes that a joint statement is due seven days in advance of each CMC pursuant to the 

Court’s Standing Order in Civil Cases. Failure by plaintiff to cooperate in timely submitting a 

joint statement may result in sanctions including dismissal for failure to prosecute. Moreover, 

plaintiff is admonished that the Court has a strong preference for in-person attendance at these 

conferences and “routine inconveniences of travel do not constitute good cause” to appear 

telephonically. Standing Order in Civil Cases § 6.

This Order terminates Docket Number 16.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 10, 2016

______________________________________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:14-cv-03955-YGR Document 17 Filed 03/10/16 Page 2 of 2