Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02786/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02786-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Scott Johnson
Plaintiff
Kimberly T. Le
Defendant
Bach Thuoc Vu
Defendant

Document Text:

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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SCOTT JOHNSON, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BACH THUOC VU, in his individual and 

representative capacity as Trustee—Vole 

Irrevocable Family Trust; KIMBERLY T 

LE, and Does 1-10, 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-2786-JAM-EFB 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

 On September 4, 2015, plaintiff filed a motion to compel defendant Kimberly T Le to 

provide responses to plaintiff’s discovery requests. ECF No. 14. Plaintiff noticed his motion for 

hearing on October 7, 2015. Id. The matter was subsequently continued to October 14, 2015. 

ECF No. 15. 

 Defendant failed to provide any response to plaintiff’s discovery requests, and accordingly 

Local Rule 251(e) applies. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 251(e) (providing that the requirement that the 

parties file a Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement does not apply “when there has been a 

complete and total failure to respond to a discovery request or order.”). Under Local Rule 251(e), 

a responding party must file a response to the discovery motion at issue no later than seven days 

before the hearing date, or in this instance by October 7, 2015. The deadline has passed and 

defendant has failed to file any response to plaintiff’s motion. 

Case 2:14-cv-02786-JAM-EFB Document 16 Filed 10/09/15 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

 Local Rule 110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be grounds for 

imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the 

inherent power of the Court.” Accordingly, good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED that: 

 1. The hearing on plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 14) is continued to November 4, 2015 at 

10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 8. 

 2. Defendant shall show cause, in writing, no later than October 21, 2015, why sanctions 

should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to 

plaintiff’s motion. 

 3. Defendant shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition 

thereto, no later than October 21, 2015. 

 4. Failure of to file an opposition to the motion will be deemed a statement of nonopposition thereto, and may result in the granting of plaintiff’s motion. 

 5. Plaintiff may file a reply to defendant’s opposition, if any, on or before October 28, 

2015. 

DATED: October 8, 2015. 

Case 2:14-cv-02786-JAM-EFB Document 16 Filed 10/09/15 Page 2 of 2