Hope Fernandez Kambick, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated v. Papa Murphy’s International LLC

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: March 23, 2026
• Docket: 1:25-cv-01645
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 HOPE FERNANDEZ KAMBICK, Case No. 1:25-cv-01645-KES-SAB 11 individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO 12 SHOW CAUSE IN WRITING WHY Plaintiff, MONETARY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT 13 ISSUE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH v. COURT ORDER 14 PAPA MURPHY’S INTERNATIONAL LLC, DEADLINE: MARCH 27, 2026 15 Defendant. 16 17 On March 6, 2026, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file a status report regarding the status 18 of readiness to proceed with the initial scheduling conference. (ECF No. 7.) The Court observed 19 that the deadline for Defendant to file an answer had come and gone and inquired of Plaintiff 20 whether she planned to move for an entry of default or for a continuance in order to allow 21 Defendant to appear and answer. (Id.) On March 16, 2026, Plaintiff filed a status report 22 indicating that she and Defendant had privately stipulated to allow Defendant to appear and 23 answer by March 24, 2026. (ECF No. 8.) No stipulation to that effect was filed on the docket. 24 Accordingly, on March 17, 2026, the Court ordered the parties to file a stipulation by March 20, 25 2026.1 The deadline to file a stipulation has come and gone, and Plaintiff has not filed a 26 stipulation, a motion for entry of default, or any other response to the Court’s March 17, 2026 27 1 Indeed, the Court observes that such a stipulation would need Court approval given that Defendant has already 1 | order. 2 Local Rule 110 provides that “[flailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these 3 | Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all 4 | sanctions ... within the inherent power of the Court.” The Court has the inherent power to 5 | control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, 6 | including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 7 | 2000). 8 The Court shall require Plaintiff to show cause why monetary sanctions should not issue 9 | for the failure to file a stipulation or a response to the Court’s March 17, 2026 order. 10 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 11 1. Plaintiff shall show cause in writing no later than March 27, 2026, why monetary 12 sanctions should not issue for the failure to file a stipulation or a response to the 13 Court’s March 17, 2026 order (ECF No. 9.); 14 2. Should Defendant appear and file an answer, such appearance and answer shall 15 not absolve Plaintiff of responding to this order to show cause; and 16 3. Failure to comply with this order will result in the issuance of sanctions. 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. DAA Le 19 | Dated: _ March 23, 2026 _ OES STANLEY A. BOONE 20 United States Magistrate Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28