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.

Board of Trustees of Ibew Local Union v. Porges Enterprises

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


November 28, 2012

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF IBEW LOCAL UNION NO. 100 PENSION TRUST FUND, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
PORGES ENTERPRISES, INC. ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER TO FILE CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT OR SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED

On April 25, 2012, the Court issued a Scheduling Order. The Scheduling Order explicitly instructed the parties as to the preparation of Confidential Settlement Conference Statements to be submitted via email to the Court in advance of the December 4, 2012, settlement conference:

At least five (5) court days prior to the Settlement Conference the parties shall submit, directly to Judge Oberto's chambers by e-mail to SKOorders@caed.uscourts.gov, a Confidential Settlement Conference Statement. (Doc. 15, 6:14-16.)

Additionally, on November 6, 2012, the Court issued an Order re Settlement Conference. (Doc. 16.) The November 6, 2012, order reiterated that the parties were to provide a Confidential Settlement Conference Statement to the Court no later than five (5) business days before the Settlement Conference. (Doc. 16, 2, 1:25-2:2.) As the Settlement Conference is set for Tuesday, December 4, 2012, the parties' Confidential Settlement Conference Statements were to be provided to the Court via email no later than November 27, 2012. Defendants failed to timely submit their Confidential Settlement Conference Statement.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that, no later than 12:00 p.m. noon on November 29, 2012, Defendants email their Confidential Settlement Conference Statement to SKOorders@caed.uscourts.gov or show cause why the Court should not impose sanctions under Local Rule 110 for failing to comply with the April 25, 2012, and November 6, 2012, orders of this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20121128

© 1992-2012 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.