Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00618/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00618-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Maria Merritt
Defendant
United States of America
Plaintiff

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. CIV S-10-618 MCE EFB PS

Plaintiff,

vs.

MARIA MERRITT,

Defendant. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

 /

This case is before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 

302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On June 2, 2010, the undersigned issued an order setting

a status (pretrial scheduling) conference for July 14, 2010 and directing the parties to file a status

report within fourteen days of the scheduled conference (or by June 30, 2010). Dckt. No. 11. 

On June 30, 2010, plaintiff filed a status report in accordance with the June 2 order;

however, no such status report was filed by defendant.1

 Therefore, defendant will be ordered to

file a status report and will also be ordered to show cause why she should not be sanctioned for

her failure to comply with the June 2, 2010 order. E.D. Cal. L.R. 110 (“Failure of counsel or of a

party to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition

1

 Although defendant recently filed a notice of disposition and settlement of this case, Dckt.

No. 15, it does not appear that plaintiff has stipulated to such settlement or to dismissal of the action. 

If the parties have in fact reached a settlement or if plaintiff does agree to a voluntary dismissal of

this action, plaintiff shall notify the court of that fact as soon as possible.

1

Case 2:10-cv-00618-MCE -EFB Document 16 Filed 07/08/10 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

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

of the Court.”); see also L.R. 183 (“Any individual representing himself or herself without an

attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of Civil or Criminal Procedure and by these Local

Rules.”); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (“Failure to follow a district court’s

local rules is a proper ground for dismissal.”). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The status (pretrial scheduling) conference currently set for July 14, 2010 is continued

to August 25, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 24. 

2. On or before August 11, 2010, defendant shall file a status report addressing the issues

raised in the June 2, 2010 order, Dckt. No. 11 at 2. 

3. On or before August 11, 2010, defendant shall show cause, in writing, why sanctions

should not be imposed for her failure to comply with the June 2, 2010 order.

4. Plaintiff is not required to file a further status report or a response to defendant’s

status report, but if it elects to do so, any such status report or response to defendant’s status

report shall be filed on or before August 18, 2010.

5. Failure of defendant to comply with this order may result in the imposition of

sanctions, including a recommendation for entry of default against defendant.

DATED: July 7, 2010

2

Case 2:10-cv-00618-MCE -EFB Document 16 Filed 07/08/10 Page 2 of 2