Peters

United States of America v. Matthew H. Peters, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 19, 20252:24-cv-00287California8,134 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 2:24-cv-00287-WBS-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS ON PLAINTIFF’S

14 MATTHEW H. PETERS, et al., MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND CIVIL

CONTEMPT

15 Defendant. 16 (ECF Nos. 87, 98)

17 18 Pending before the Court are plaintiff United States of America’s motion for sanctions 19 against defendant Matthew Peters and his affiliates1 (ECF No. 98), the order to show cause 20 hearing on whether to hold defendant Peters in civil contempt (ECF No. 115; see ECF No. 87), 21 and plaintiff’s request to deem certain facts admitted (ECF Nos. 80, 90).2 On May 22, 2025, the 22 Court issued an order granting in part and denying in part plaintiff’s motion to compel and for 23

24 1 These entities are Bayview Specialty Services LLC, Coastline Specialty Services LLC, Strand View Enterprises LLC, Innovative Specialty Services LLC, Paragon Partners LLC, Cardea 25 Consulting LLC, Praxis Marketing…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.