U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. KS Aviation, Inc. ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 U.S EQUAL EMPLOYMENT Case No. 1:18-cv-00744-NONE-SKO OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, 10 ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO Plaintiff, SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS 11 SHOULD NOT ISSUE FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S ORDER 12 v. OR ALTERNATIVELY TO SUBMIT SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 13 KS AVIATION, INC. d/b/a SIERRA STATEMENT 14 ACADEMY OF AERONAUTICS; XING KONG AVIATION SERVICE, LLC; and 15 Does 1-10 Inclusive, 16 Defendants. _____________________________________/ 17 18 A settlement conference in this action is set for August 18, 2020, at 10:30 a.m. before the 19 undersigned. (Doc. 83.) Pursuant to the Amended Order re Settlement Conference filed April 21, 20 2020 (Order), the parties were each to submit a confidential settlement conference statement to the 21 Court two weeks prior to the conference date. (Id. at 2.) The Court has timely received the 22 confidential statement from Plaintiff; however, no statement has been received from Defendants.1 23 This Court spends considerable time preparing for settlement conference so as to make it 24 meaningful to the parties and results in a greater likelihood of settlement success. Settlement is 25 extremely important in this district where the judges have one of the highest caseloads per judge in 26 the United States. The settlement conference statement assists the Court in adequately preparing 27 28 1 This is not the first time Defendants have failed to comply with the Court’s orders in this case. (See Docs. 33, 37, 1 for these matters. They are not pro forma. 2 Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules 3 or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions 4 . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to control its docket 5 and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal of 6 the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles Cty., 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000). 7 Pursuant to the Order, the parties’ confidential settlement statements were due on August 4, 8 2020. As noted above, Defendants have not submitted their confidential statement. Defendants are 9 therefore required to show cause why sanctions should not issue for the failure to submit their 10 confidential settlement conference statement in compliance with the Court’s order. Alternatively, 11 Defendants may submit their confidential settlement conference statement by August 7, 2020. 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 13 1. By no later than August 7, 2020, Defendants shall either: 14 a. file a written response to this order showing cause why sanctions should not 15 issue for the failure to comply with the Court’s order; or 16 b. submit their confidential settlement conference statement. 17 Failure to comply with this order may be grounds for the imposition of sanctions on any and 18 all counsel as well as any party or parties who cause such non-compliance. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 Sheila K. Oberto 21 Dated: August 5, 2020 /s/ . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28