Garcia
Garcia v. Kim
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORLANDO GARCIA, Case No. 21-cv-09789-AGT
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
v. MOTIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
RELIEF
JONGGAN KIM, et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 19, 30 Defendants.
Jonggan Kim hasn’t complied with General Order 56, which requires him to participate in a settlement meeting (GO 56 ¶ 8) and to serve initial disclosures beforehand (GO 56 ¶ 4). See Dkt 7 (scheduling order adopting GO 56). By September 5, 2022, Kim must serve his initial disclosures and provide plaintiff’s counsel with three dates on which he is available to conduct a settlement meeting. All three dates must be before September 27, 2022.1 Failure to comply with this order or with General Order 56 may result in sanctions. Sanctions won’t be imposed now. Kim is one of three defendants. The other two haven’t entered an appearance, and the Clerk has entered default as to one of them. See Dkt. 12. Because all parties haven’t appeared and con- sented to magistrate-judge jurisdiction, the undersigned can’t rule on any dispositive motions or preside at trial. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1); Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500,…