Unit 53, Inc. v. Run Roadlines, Inc

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNIT 53, INC., Case No. 2:24-cv-01718-DJC-CSK 12 Plaintiff, ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS RE: PLAINTIFF’S

13 v. MOTION FOR SANCTIONS 14 RUN ROADLINES, INC., et al., (ECF No. 68) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Unit 53, Inc. moves for sanctions against Defendants Run Roadlines, Inc., 18 Manpreet Randhawa, and 3515 Hwy 99, LLC for failing to comply with discovery 19 obligations and the Court’s orders.1 (ECF No. 68.) Plaintiff seeks an order striking 20 Defendants’ answers and affirmative defenses, deeming all Requests for Admission 21 (“RFAs”) served on each Defendant admitted, or alternatively, an award of attorneys’ 22 fees, costs, and expenses. Id. Pursuant to local Rule 251(e), Plaintiff’s motion is 23 excepted from the requirement for a Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement 24 because it is only seeking sanctions. Because Defendants failed to oppose the motion, 25 the June 3, 2025 hearing was vacated. (ECF No. 76.) For the reasons…