Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-02238/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-02238-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability

---

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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Judith Tagata, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

Schwarz Pharma Incorporated, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-14-02238-TUC-JAS

ORDER 

 On 8/4/14, the Court issued a detailed Order requiring the parties to provide paper 

copies of any authority or evidence relied upon by the parties in relation to filings before 

the Court. See Doc. 13. While Defendant timely complied with this Order, Plaintiff 

failed to comply with this Order despite the fact that the Order explicitly warned that 

non-compliance could result in dismissal with prejudice. See id. at pp. 3-4 (“Within 

seven days after a document is filed, the parties shall provide the Court with paper copies 

in strict compliance with this Order and file a notice that they have strictly complied with 

the requirements in this Order; failure to timely file this required notice will be viewed as 

a party's admission that they have failed to comply with this Court's Order . . . If a party 

fails to submit the required authority binder and other paper copies required by this 

Order, the Court may summarily deny or grant a motion as applicable to the party that 

failed to comply with this Order, and the Court may dismiss the case with prejudice or 

enter a default judgment as to the non-complying party”). The Court has not received the 

required copies from Plaintiff, and the docket reflects that Plaintiff did not file a notice 

Case 4:14-cv-02238-JAS Document 25 Filed 10/28/14 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 

reflecting that she attempted to comply with the Court’s Order. See Catz v. Chalker,512 

Fed.Appx. 693, 694 (9th Cir. 2013) (affirming dismissal with prejudice for failure to 

comply with the district court’s order requiring plaintiff to submit an authority binder 

containing any authority relied upon to support his briefs) (unpublished disposition); Catz 

v. Chalker, CV 03-91-TUC-FRZ (Doc. 362 at pp. 1-2). 

 Plaintiff shall comply with the Court’s Order by 10/31/14; as Plaintiff has already 

been warned, if Plaintiff fails to timely comply with the Court’s Order, Defendant’s 

motion may be summarily be granted and dismissed with prejudice without further notice 

to Plaintiff. 

 Dated this 28th day of October, 2014. 

Honorable James A. Soto 

United States District Judge 

Case 4:14-cv-02238-JAS Document 25 Filed 10/28/14 Page 2 of 2