Runyan v. LendingClub Corporation
- Saundra Armstrong
- 4:20-cv-03030
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Runyan v. Lending Club Corporation, Judge Armstrong ordered the parties to explain their absences or face dismissal and possible sanctions.
Ty Runyan and Equifax Information Services, LLC, the only remaining defendant, were ordered to respond; the order also referred to the parties’ counsel.
What happened
In Runyan v. Lending Club Corporation, the court addressed the parties’ failure to attend a required case-management conference, a meeting about managing the case.
Ty Runyan attended the first scheduled conference, but Equifax Information Services, LLC, the only remaining defendant, did not. After the court rescheduled the conference, neither side appeared on September 30, 2020.
Judge Armstrong ordered the parties to explain within seven days why the case should not be dismissed for failing to follow a court order and why monetary penalties should not be imposed. The court did not dismiss the case in this order.
The detailed version
- Runyan v. LendingClub Corporation · No. 4:20-cv-03030
- Saundra Armstrong
- Sept. 30, 2020
Background
The court had scheduled a telephonic case-management conference for September 3, 2020. Ty Runyan appeared, but Equifax Information Services, LLC—the only remaining defendant—did not. The court rescheduled the conference for September 30, 2020, at 3:15 p.m.
On September 30, the court remained on the conference call from 3:15 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Neither party appeared.
Order to Show Cause
The court stated that failing to follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court’s local rules, or a court order can support dismissal under Rule 41(b), which permits dismissal for failure to prosecute or comply with court requirements.
The court ordered the parties to show cause—meaning explain—why the case should not be dismissed under Rule 41(b) and why monetary sanctions should not be imposed for failing to comply with a court order. Within seven days after the order was filed, the parties had to submit a certificate from counsel explaining the nature and current status of the case, why it had not been tried or otherwise ended, any basis for opposing dismissal, and what was expected to happen if the case continued.
Disposition
The court warned that failing to fully comply with the order would be sufficient grounds to dismiss the action without further notice. This order itself did not dismiss the case or impose monetary sanctions. The order was issued by Senior United States District Judge Aundra Brown Armstrong.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.