Brian Lichtenberg LLC et al v. Alex & Chloe Inc et al

Filing 141

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: FAILURE TO APPEAR AT FINAL PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: The Clerks entry of default against some of the Defendants in this matter did not relieve Plaintiffs of their obligations toattend the pre-trial con ference and to file the necessary pre-trial documents. Plaintiffs are hereby ordered to file an explanatory statement, not to exceed five pages, (1) explaining Plaintiffs failures with respect to the pre-trial conference and (2) laying out how Plaintiffs intend to proceed against the remaining Defendants, should this case go forward. Failure to comply withthis Order by May 20, 2016 shall result in the dismissal of thisaction. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS) (vv)

1
2

O

3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

BRIAN LICHTENBERG,LLC, a
California limited liability
company; BRIAN LICHTENBERG,
an individual,

13
Plaintiff,
14
v.
15
16
17
18
19
20

ALEX & CHLOE, INC., a
California corporation;
CHRISTOPHER WALTER
LICHTENBERG, an individual;
MARKED SHOWROOM, LLC, a
Californai limited liability
company; JACQUELINE YI, an
individual; TU TRAN, an
individual KYLE MOCKETT, an
individual; KAYTEE ENRIGHT,
an individual,

21
Defendants.
22

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CV 13-06837 DDP (PJWx)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: FAILURE
TO APPEAR AT FINAL PRE-TRIAL
CONFERENCE

23
24

Plaintiffs are ordered to show cause why this case should not

25

be dismissed for failure to appear at the final pre-trial

26

conference.

27

scheduled, on May 16, 2016.

28

Plaintiffs, who are represented by counsel.

The final pre-trial conference took place, as
No party appeared, including
Nor did any party,

1
2

including Plaintiffs, file any pre-trial documents.
The court notes that it has stricken the Answers of three of

3

the Defendants (Dkts. 129, 131).

4

Plaintiffs requested that the Clerk enter default against all seven

5

Defendants.

6

Deficiency (Dkt. 137), that request was improper.

7

Clerk’s office entered the default of only those three Defendants

8

whose Answers have been stricken.

9

Nevertheless, on April 30, 2016,

As recognized by the Clerk’s office Notice of
Accordingly, the

(Dkt. 139).

The Clerk’s entry of default against some of the Defendants in

10

this matter did not relieve Plaintiffs of their obligations to

11

attend the pre-trial conference and to file the necessary pre-trial

12

documents.

13

statement, not to exceed five pages, (1) explaining Plaintiffs’

14

failures with respect to the pre-trial conference and (2) laying

15

out how Plaintiffs intend to proceed against the remaining

16

Defendants, should this case go forward.

17

this Order by May 20, 2016 shall result in the dismissal of this

18

action.

Plaintiffs are hereby ordered to file an explanatory

Failure to comply with

19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21
22
23

Dated: May 16, 2016
DEAN D. PREGERSON
United States District Judge

24
25
26
27
28
2