Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Moore v. USC Univ. Hosp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


August 26, 2009

MARTEEN MOORE
v.
USC UNIV. HOSP., INC., ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Percy Anderson, United States District Judge

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS -- COURT ORDER

On May 17, 2009, after defendants USC University Hospital, Inc. ("USC") and Dr. Michael Y. Wang ("Wang") had filed motions for summary judgment, and after the deadline for providing expert reports had passed, plaintiff Marteen Moore ("Plaintiff") filed an ex parte application to continue the trial and pretrial dates in this matter, including the motion cut-off, discovery cut-off, and already-passed expert witness designation and report exchange dates. Due to Plaintiff's counsel's family health concerns, the Court granted the application and continued the dates in this action. It also continued the hearing date for USC and Wang's motions for summary judgment to August 31, 2009. Subsequently, defendant Confluent Surgical, Inc. ("Confluent") filed a motion for summary judgment and Wang filed a motion for bond and a motion to exclude expert witness testimony for Plaintiff's failure to timely designate experts and provide expert reports. These motions were also originally scheduled to be heard on August 31, 2009. Consequently, all of Plaintiff's oppositions were due on August 17, 2009.

However, Plaintiff did not file her oppositions to USC's and Wang's motions for summary judgment until August 21, 2009, and she failed to file her opposition to Confluent's motion for summary judgment until August 26, 2009. She did not file her opposition to Wang's motion for bond until August 24, 2009. Plaintiff provided no explanation for her late-filed oppositions.

Accordingly, no later than September 4, 2009, Plaintiff is ordered to show cause in writing, signed under penalty of perjury, why the Court should not impose sanctions on her or her counsel, including but not limited to striking her late-filed oppositions, for failure to comply with the local rules and the Court's orders. Failure to respond to this Order may result in the imposition of sanctions, including but not limited to the striking of the late-filed oppositions. The Court also sets a hearing on the Order to Show Cause on Tuesday, September 8, 2009, at 1:30 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20090826

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.