UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. CV 20-6119 MRW Date November 15, 2021 Title CS Heritage v. City of Los Angeles

Present: Hon. Michael R. Wilner, U.S. Magistrate Judge Veronica Piper n/a Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys for Plaintiff: Attorneys for Defendant: n/a n/a Proceedings: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 1. The Court recently directed the parties to work out a new schedule for this stalled civil action and to file a stipulation by last Friday. (Docket # 36.) 2. According to a non-stipulated report from the defense (Docket # 37), the parties spoke about a revised schedule. However, Plaintiff did not respond to a request to participate in the joint report submission. Additionally, the defense informed the Court about significant deficiencies in Plaintiffs participation in discovery in recent months. 3. As things stand today, Plaintiff is done with its case preparation. Although I relieved the parties of the formal scheduling order and discovery cutoff several months ago, I told the parties that discovery would likely end today — November 15 — unless they gave me an updated schedule. (Docket # 35.) Plaintiff has apparently forfeited the opportunity to take steps to seek further relief to save its case. Defendants, by contrast, appear to have been reasonably diligent in serving written discovery and attempting to take depositions of relevant witnesses — but to no avail, according to the recent report, due to Plaintiffs recalcitrance. (Docket # 37 at 3.) 4. Mr. Bird assured me several months ago that he was ready, willing, and able to advance this case on behalf of his clients. However, his recent conduct — the lack of meaningful discovery responses from Plaintiff, the unacceptable delay in arranging for depositions of his clients, and the failure to respond to the Court’s update order — appears to belie that. 5. Therefore, Mr. Bird is ORDERED to show cause why the Court should not consider imposing personal sanctions against him and litigation-related sanctions against his client in this action. Plaintiffs lawyer will file a declaration (NTE five pages) addressing these issues and his alleged misconduct by noon on Friday, November 19. CV-90 (10/08) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. CV 20-6119 MRW Date November 15, 2021 Title CS Heritage v. City of Los Angeles

6. After the Court reviews Mr. Bird’s sworn statement, it will consider whether to set the matter for a further, in-person status conference or sua sponte set new deadlines, including a schedule for dispositive motions as the defense requests. Mr. Bird and CS Heritage are informed that failure to comply with the terms of this order may result in the action being dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Proc. 41(b). Applied Underwriters, Inc. v. Lichtenegger, 913 F.3d 884 (9th Cir. 2019).

CV-90 (10/08) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 2 of 2