Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00058/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00058-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

JACK MITCHELL, JR.; AND MARJA

MITCHELL,

Plaintiffs,

v.

STEVEN CULVER., individually 

and as a Federal Ranger;

BRIAN J.DENSMORE, 

individually and as a Federal 

Ranger,

Defendants.

No. 2:15-cv-00058-GEB-CMK

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND 

CONTINUING STATUS (PRETRIAL 

SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE; FED. R. 

CIV. P. 4(M) NOTICE

The January 9, 2015 Order Setting Status (Pretrial 

Scheduling) Conference scheduled a status conference in this case 

on April 20, 2015, and required the parties to file a joint 

status report no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the 

scheduling conference. The January 9, 2015 Order further required

a status report be filed regardless of whether a joint report 

could be procured. No status report was filed as ordered.

Therefore, Plaintiffs are Ordered to Show Cause (“OSC”) 

in a writing to be filed no later than April 24, 2015, why 

sanctions should not be imposed against them and/or their counsel 

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

failure to file a timely status report. The written response 

Case 2:15-cv-00058-GEB-CMK Document 4 Filed 04/14/15 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

shall also state whether Plaintiffs or their counsel is at fault, 

and whether a hearing is requested on the OSC.1 If a hearing is 

requested, it will be held on June 8, 2015, at 9:00 a.m., just 

prior to the status conference, which is rescheduled to that date 

and time. A joint status report shall be filed no later than 

fourteen (14) days prior to the status conference. 

Further, Plaintiffs are notified under Rule 4(m) of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that failure to serve each 

Defendant with process within the 120 day period prescribed in 

that Rule may result in the unserved defendant(s) and/or this 

action being dismissed. To avoid dismissal, on or before May 11, 

2015, Plaintiffs shall file proof of service for each Defendant

or a sufficient explanation why service was not completed within 

Rule 4(m)’s prescribed service period.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 14, 2015

 

1 “If the fault lies with the attorney, that is where the impact of 

sanction should be lodged. If the fault lies with the clients, that is where 

the impact of the sanction should be lodged.” In re Sanction of Baker, 744 

F.2d 1438, 1442 (10th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1014 (1985). 

Sometimes the faults of attorneys, and their consequences, are visited upon 

clients. Myers v. Shekter (In re Hill), 775 F.2d 1385, 1387 (9th Cir. 1985).

Case 2:15-cv-00058-GEB-CMK Document 4 Filed 04/14/15 Page 2 of 2