Naiman v. True Renewable Energy, Incorporated
- Kandis Westmore
- 4:18-cv-04540
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Naiman v. True Renewable Energy, Judge Westmore ordered Naiman to explain his missed dismissal deadline and file dismissal papers or risk sanctions.
Sidney Naiman was directly affected because he was ordered to file dismissal papers and explain his missed deadline. The proposed class members could be affected by any dismissal of the class claims, which is why the court required consideration of possible prejudice to them.
What happened
In Naiman v. True Renewable Energy, Incorporated, Sidney Naiman had filed a dismissal of his individual claims with prejudice and his class claims without prejudice. The court required him to file additional dismissal papers within 60 days and address factors concerning possible harm to class members.
Naiman later requested 30 more days to finalize a settlement agreement, making the deadline October 16, 2019. As of the court’s order, he had not filed the required dismissal papers.
Judge Kandis Westmore ordered Naiman to show cause by November 22, 2019, why he should not be sanctioned. The court required him to file the dismissal, address the class-claim factors if applicable, and explain why he missed the deadline.
The detailed version
- Naiman v. True Renewable Energy, Incorporated · No. 4:18-cv-04540
- Kandis Westmore
- Nov. 13, 2019
Background
On July 17, 2019, Sidney Naiman filed a voluntary dismissal of his individual claims with prejudice and his class claims without prejudice. The court then ordered him to file a dismissal within 60 days unless the court granted an extension. The court also required Naiman to address the factors identified in Diaz v. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands if he sought to dismiss the class claims. Those factors concern whether dismissing class claims would prejudice class members.
Naiman later filed a notice requesting 30 additional days to file the required dispositive documentation so he could finalize a settlement agreement. The resulting deadline was October 16, 2019. The court stated that Naiman had not filed his dismissal as of November 13, 2019.
Order
The court issued an order to show cause, meaning it required Naiman to explain why the court should not impose a sanction. By November 22, 2019, Naiman was ordered to: (1) file his dismissal, including an analysis of the Diaz factors if he was dismissing the class claims; and (2) explain why he did not timely comply with the court’s earlier order.
The opinion does not impose a sanction or enter a dismissal. It orders Naiman to respond and file the specified documents.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.