Jose Urena v. Central California Almond Growers Assn. ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE URENA, an individual, on behalf of ) Case No.: 1:18-cv-0517 JLT EPG himself and others similarly situated, ) 12 ) ORDER TO CLASS COUNSEL TO SHOW CAUSE Plaintiff, ) WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED 13 ) FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE v. ) COURT’S ORDER 14 CENTRAL CALIFORNIA ALMOND ) GROWERS ASSN., ) 15 ) Defendant. ) 16 ) 17 On December 22, 2022, the Court approved supplemental distribution of award payments to 18 Settlement Class Members. (Doc. 71.) The Court ordered the settlement payments to be made within 19 60 days of the date of service of the approval. (Id. at 3.) Consistent with the terms of the settlement, 20 the Court ordered that Class Members would have 180 days from the mailing to cash their checks. 21 (Id.) Class Counsel were directed to file a declaration from the Settlement Administrator regarding the 22 supplemental distribution within 30 days of the cashing deadline. (Id.) Thus, a declaration should 23 have been filed within 270 days from the date of service of the approval order, or no later than 24 September 18, 2023. To date, Class Counsel have not filed a declaration or otherwise communicated 25 with the Court concerning the distribution. 26 The Local Rules, corresponding with Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, provide: “Failure of counsel or of a 27 party to comply with . . . any order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any 28 and all sanctions … within the inherent power of the Court.” Local Rule 110. “District courts have 1 || inherent power to control their dockets,” and in exercising that power, a court may impose sanctions 2 || including terminating sanctions. Thompson v. Housing Authority of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 3 || (9th Cir. 1986). For example, a court may dismiss an action with prejudice, based on a party’s failure 4 || failure to obey a court order or failure to comply with local rules. See, e.g. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 5 || F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (terminating sanctions for failure to comply with an order); 6 || Malone vy. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987) (sanctions for failure to comply □□□ 7 court order). 8 Accordingly, within 21 days, Class Counsel SHALL show cause in writing why sanctions 9 || should not be imposed for the failure comply with the Court’s Order or to file a declaration from the 10 || Settlement Administrator that addresses the date of mailing and whether any funds remain 11 || undistributed. Failure to comply may result in the imposition of sanctions. 12 13 ||IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 Dated: _ November 2, 2023 ( Lint WM, L. | ws hn \ 15 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28