Mullins

Mullins v. CGI Federal Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 9, 20233:22-cv-01779California1,437 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 AMED MULLINS, an individual, Case No.: 22-cv-1779-DMS-DDL

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S v. MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

14 CGI FEDERAL INC., a Delaware [Dkt. No. 40] corporation, and DOES 1-20, Defendants.

I. BACKGROUND Before the Court is a document filed by Plaintiff on October 12, 2023, and captioned “Response to Timothy L. Hix’s False Perjury, Violation of Professional Responsibility, Violation of Privilege, and Request for Sanctions” (“Motion for Sanctions”). Dkt. No. 40. On September 27, 2023, pursuant to this Court’s Chambers Rules, Defendant’s counsel, Timothy L. Hix, sent an email to the Court raising four separate discovery disputes: (1) Plaintiff’s refusal to answer Defendant’s questions during her September 7, 2023, deposition about CGI’s Policies, Sexual Harassment Notices, and Other State/Local Required…

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.