Eisen v. Day

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 NOAM EISEN, et al., Case No. 21-cv-05349-VKD

9 Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE 10 v. VIOLATION OF ADR LOCAL RULE 7-4 11 EMILY DAY, Re: Dkt. No. 108 Defendant. 12

13 AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS 14 15 On November 15, 2023, plaintiff and counter-defendant Noam Eisen filed an opposition 16 (Dkt. No. 108) to defendant and counter-claimant Emily Day’s motion for leave to file an 17 amended complaint (Dkt. No. 106). Mr. Eisen’s opposition includes representations regarding the 18 parties’ communications and positions during settlement conferences with Magistrate Judge 19 Beeler to which Ms. Day objects. See Dkt. No. 108 at 4; Dkt. No. 108-1 ¶ 7; Dkt. No. 109 at 2. 20 ADR Local Rule 7-4 requires parties and counsel to treat information exchanged during 21 settlement conferences as confidential and to refrain from disclosing this information to the 22 assigned judge, subject to certain exceptions. See ADR L.R. 7-4; Shields v. Fed’n Internationale 23 De Natation, No. 18-CV-07393-JSC, 2022 WL 298575, at *2-3 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 1, 2022). 24 Accordingly, Mr. Eisen is ordered to show cause why the Court should not impose monetary or 25 other sanctions against him and/or his counsel for disclosing confidential information in violation 26 of ADR Local Rule 7-4. A written response to this Order must be filed by December 8, 2023. 27 The Court will hold a hearing on this Order to Show Cause on December 19, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 Dated: November 29, 2023 3 . 28 ‘ Unigvin®, □□□□□□ VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI 5 United States Magistrate Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

© 15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28