Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-03277/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-03277-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 140
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instruments
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CONG MINH TRAN AND

PHUONG HUYNH,

NO. CIV. S-09-3277 LKK/DAD

Plaintiffs,

v.

O R D E R

WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, 

et al.,

Defendants.

 /

In an order filed March 1, 2010 (Dkt. No. 25), the court

ordered plaintiffs’ counsel to show cause why a sanction of $250

should not issue for counsel’s failure to comply with the local

rules. Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a response conceding that the

sanction was appropriate and stating that a check for this amount

had been tendered to the court. (Dkt. No. 31.) In an order filed

March 11, 2010, the court held that no sanction beyond $250 was

required, but that counsel must tender an affidavit affirming that

her clients would not be made responsible for this sum. (Dkt. No.

Case 2:09-cv-03277-LKK -KJN Document 37 Filed 07/02/10 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

2

34.) The court neglected to provide a deadline for the filing of

this affidavit.

It is now June 30, over three months since that order was

issued. The required affidavit has not been filed. Perhaps more

troublingly, review of the docket and the court’s internal records

discloses no evidence that counsel ever actually paid the $250

sanction. Accordingly, the court ORDERS as follows:

1. Counsel for plaintiffs is reminded of the obligations

imposed by the court’s March 11, 2010 order.

2. Counsel for plaintiffs is hereby ORDERED TO PERSONALLY

APPEAR for a hearing on an ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE as to

whether the $250 was paid, if not, why further sanctions

should not issue counsel’s failure to comply with court

orders and for counsel’s apparent misrepresentation to

the court, and also whether further sanctions should

issue for failure to file the required affidavit. See

Local Rule 110. Counsel is strongly encouraged to meet

her preexisting obligations prior to this hearing, but

counsel is cautioned that doing so will not cause the

court to vacate the hearing. This hearing is SET for on

Monday, July 26, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. in courtroom 4.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 2, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-03277-LKK -KJN Document 37 Filed 07/02/10 Page 2 of 2