Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01266/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01266-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Law Office of Les Zieve
Defendant
Herbert Miller
Plaintiff
Les Zieve
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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HERBERT MILLER,

Plaintiff,

v.

LAW OFFICE OF LES ZIEVE,

Defendant.

No. 2:14-cv-01266-GEB-KJN

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND 

CONTINUING STATUS (PRETRIAL 

SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE; FED. R. 

CIV. P. 4(M) NOTICE

The June 10, 2015 Minute Order scheduled a status 

conference in this case on August 31, 2015, and required the 

parties to file a joint status report no later than fourteen (14) 

days prior to the scheduling conference. No status report was 

filed as ordered.

Therefore, Plaintiff is Ordered to Show Cause (“OSC”) 

in a writing to be filed no later than August 28, 2015, why 

sanctions should not be imposed against him and/or his counsel 

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

failure to file a timely status report. The written response 

shall also state whether Plaintiff or his counsel is at fault, 

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

 

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 

Case 2:14-cv-01266-GEB-KJN Document 25 Filed 08/20/15 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

requested, it will be held on November 23, 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, Plaintiff is notified under Rule 4(m) of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that failure to serve Defendant 

Law Office of Les Zieve with process within the 120 day period 

prescribed in that Rule may result in the action being dismissed. 

To avoid dismissal, on or before November 20, 2015, Plaintiff

shall file proof of service for Defendant or a sufficient 

explanation why service was not completed within Rule 4(m)’s 

prescribed service period.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 19, 2015

 

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

Case 2:14-cv-01266-GEB-KJN Document 25 Filed 08/20/15 Page 2 of 2