Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00259/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00259-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jaime Perez
Plaintiff
Nancy Silva
Plaintiff
Sun Pacific Farming Cooperative, Inc.
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

JAIME PEREZ and NANCY SILVA, 

individually and on behalf of others 

similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SUN PACIFIC FARMING 

COOPERATIVE, INC.,

Defendant.

No. 1:15-cv-00259-DAD-SKO

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

On August 5, 2015, the court issued a Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order in this action 

setting a Final Pretrial Conference for December 8, 2016, at 3:30 p.m., and a November 17, 2016 

deadline for the filing of a joint pretrial conference statement by the parties. (Doc. No. 31 at 5.) 

On February 22, 2016, due to the reassignment of the case to the undersigned, the Final Pretrial 

Conference was advanced to December 5, 2016, at 2:30 p.m. (Doc. No. 33.) On June 16, 2016, 

pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the court extended the deadline for filing a motion for 

class certification to August 5, 2016. (Doc. No. 44.) On June 30, 2016, again pursuant to the 

stipulation of the parties, an order issued granting defendant leave to file an amended answer to 

assert a new affirmative defense pursuant to California Labor Code Section 226.2(b). (Doc. No. 

46.) Defendant subsequently filed an amended answer on July 1, 2016. (Doc. No. 47.) 

However, plaintiff did not file a motion for class certification within the extended time provided 

Case 1:15-cv-00259-DAD-SKO Document 48 Filed 11/30/16 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

and the parties have failed to file the joint pretrial conference statement as required by the Pretrial 

Scheduling Order despite the deadline for doing so having passed. Finally, the parties have not

otherwise contacted the court since they submitted their stipulation and proposed order on June 

28, 2016 to allow the filing of the amended answer.

The court therefore orders the parties to show cause in writing by Friday, December 2, 

2016 regarding why sanctions should not be imposed due to their failure to comply with the 

court’s orders. The court also sets a hearing on the order to show cause at the same time as the 

scheduled Final Pretrial Conference which is set for Monday, December 5, 2016 at 2:30 pm. in 

Courtroom 5, Robert E. Coyle Federal Building, 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, California. 

The parties are forewarned, that should they fail to respond to this order to show cause in writing 

and/or fail to appear at the scheduled December 5, 2016 hearing, as required by this order, 

sanctions will likely be imposed. See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 42–46 (1991)

(recognizing that it is within the inherent authority of the court to control its docket and require 

compliance with its orders).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 30, 2016 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00259-DAD-SKO Document 48 Filed 11/30/16 Page 2 of 2