Case 5:18-cv-00762-DMG-SP Document 163 Filed 08/30/22 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:4160

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. ED CV 18-762-DMG (SPx) Date August 30, 2022

Title The Estate of Clemente Najera Aguirre, et al. v. County of Riverside Page 1 of 2

Present: The Honorable DOLLY M. GEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

KANE TIEN NOT REPORTED

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s) Attorneys Present for Defendant(s) None Present None Present

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS—ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS

SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR THE PARTIES’ FAILURE TO

COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S AUGUST 8, 2022 ORDER

On August 8, 2022, the Court ordered the parties to file a joint status report by August 22, 2022, proposing a new trial date. On August 9, 2022, Defendants filed a Declaration asserting they are preparing a petition for a writ of certiorari, asserting that it is “premature” for the parties to propose a new trial date while such a petition is being prepared, and asking the Court to vacate its order that the parties file a joint status report. Sain Decl. [Doc. # 161]. Defendants assured the Court, however, that they “[would] of course timely comply with the Court’s order if it [was] not rescinded or modified beforehand.” Id. at ¶ 6. Plaintiff filed no response to the Declaration, and the parties have not yet filed a joint status report proposing a new trial date.

The Court intends to proceed to trial in this action, notwithstanding Defendants’ plans to petition for certiorari. See, e.g., Fletcher v. Losh, No. 1:15-CV-00029-REB, 2019 WL 4453703, at *4 (D. Idaho Sept. 17, 2019) (denying motion to stay trial pending petition for certiorari where the Ninth Circuit had affirmed qualified immunity denial and denied petition for rehearing en banc); Bryant v. Jones, No. 1:04-CV-2462-WSD, 2010 WL 11482535, at *2 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 2, 2010) (denying motion to stay trial pending petition for certiorari where the Eleventh Circuit had affirmed district judge’s denial of qualified immunity). Indeed, Defendants did not file a motion or other proper request for relief from this Court’s order. Defendants’ procedurally deficient request to stay the trial in this matter is therefore DENIED. In the unlikely event the Supreme Court grants Defendants’ petition for a writ of certiorari, Defendants may file a properly-noticed motion for a stay.

The parties are ORDERED to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for their failure to timely file a joint status report proposing a new trial date. Both sides shall file a joint response to this Order no later than September 13, 2022. In the alternative, the parties may file a joint status report proposing a new trial date in compliance with the Court’s August 8, 2022 CV-90 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk KT Case 5:18-cv-00762-DMG-SP Document 163 Filed 08/30/22 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:4161

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. ED CV 18-762-DMG (SPx) Date August 30, 2022

Title The Estate of Clemente Najera Aguirre, et al. v. County of Riverside Page 2 of 2

Order. Failure to do either will result in the imposition of sanctions, and this Court’s assignment of a trial date that may not be to any party’s liking.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk KT