Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00368/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00368-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michael Still
Plaintiff
Verizon Wireless
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On March 9, 2015, the Court set the mandatory scheduling conference/status conference re: 

consent to occur on June 22, 2015. (Doc. 5) Notably, in its order setting the mandatory scheduling 

conference, the Court ordered, “Attendance at the Scheduling Conference is mandatory upon each

party not represented by counsel or by retained counsel.” (Doc. 5 at 2, emphasis in the original). 

Nevertheless, Plaintiff and his attorneys failed to appear. Accordingly, within 14 days, the Court

ORDERS Plaintiff and his attorneys of record, Joseph S. Farzam and Nazo L. Kouloukian, to show 

cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for their failure to obey the Court’s order and 

appear at the status conference re: consent/mandatory scheduling conference.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 22, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

MICHAEL STILL,

 Plaintiff.

v.

VERIZON WIRELESS, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-00368 --- JLT

ORDER TO PLAINTIFF AND HIS ATTORNEYS

OF RECORD TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 

SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR 

THEIR FAILURE TO APPEAR AT THE STATUS 

CONFERENCE RE CONSENT/SCHEDULING 

CONFERENCE

Case 1:15-cv-00368-WBS-JLT Document 12 Filed 06/22/15 Page 1 of 1