Amy Prien v. Grover Trask et al

Filing 50

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Ronald S.W. Lew.The Court, in its discretion, now GRANTS Plaintiff's request for an extension of time to respond to the Court's Order to Show Cause 48 and HERE BY ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before June 1, 2015, as to why this Action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Plaintiff is admonished and warned, for the final time, that failure to sufficiently respond by June 1, 2015, will result in this Actions dismissal with prejudice. See Eldridge v. Block, 832 F.2d 1132, 1136 (1987). SEE ORDER FOR COMPLETE DETAILS. (jre)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12 AMY PRIEN,
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
)
GROVER TRASK, RANDALL
)
TAGAMI, RON E. COFFEE,
)
KEVIN RUDDY, MICHELE DONNA )
LEVINE, ALLISON NELSON,
)
LARRY SMITH, BOB DOYLE,
)
JOSEPH I. COHEN, CHARLES
)
WILHITE, JOHN WYATT, BRYAN )
APPELHOF, WYLAND PEAK, BILL )
DAVIES, LEE COFFEY, and ten )
unknown named persons,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)

No. CV 05-06977-RSWL(Ex)
ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO
SHOW CAUSE

23
24

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Response [49] to

25 the Court’s Order to Show Cause re Dismissal for Lack
26 of Prosecution [48]. Plaintiff’s Response [49]
27 requests that the Court “extend the return date of the
28 Order to Show Cause for 100 days, until July 31, 2015
1

1 to give counsel sufficient time within which to try to
2 locate plaintiff in order to ascertain her wishes with
3 respect to this action.”
4

Pl.’s Response 1:26-2:2.

The Court, in its discretion, now GRANTS

5 Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time to respond
6 to the Court’s Order to Show Cause [48] and HEREBY
7 ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before
8 June 1, 2015, as to why this Action should not be
9 dismissed for failure to prosecute.
10

Plaintiff is admonished and warned, for the final

11 time, that failure to sufficiently respond by June 1,
12 2015, will result in this Action’s dismissal with
13 prejudice.

See Eldridge v. Block, 832 F.2d 1132, 1136

14 (1987) (“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
15 41(b), the district court may dismiss an action for
16 failure to comply with any order of the court.”); Fed.
17 R. Civ. P. 41(b).
18
19 IT IS SO ORDERED.
20
21 DATED: April 23, 2015
22

HONORABLE RONALD S.W. LEW
Senior U.S. District Judge

23
24
25
26
27
28
2