Nicholas Tirabassi v. Chase Home Finance, LLC et al

Filing 40

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell:, ORDER DISMISSING CASE by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. This case is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 62933 (1962) (finding district court did not abuse discretion in dismissing the plaintiffs complaint where counsel failed to appear at a pretrial conference); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (rfi)

JS-6
LINK:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No.

CV 14-08790 (BRO) (SSx)

Title

NICHOLAS TIRABASSI V. CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC ET AL.

Date

July 16, 2015

Present: The Honorable

BEVERLY REID O’CONNELL, United States District Judge

Renee A. Fisher

Not Present

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present

Not Present

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS)

ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
Plaintiff Nicholas Tirabassi (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action in November 2014.
(Dkt. No. 1.) The Court set a Rule 26(f) scheduling conference for June 15, 2015, at 1:30
p.m. (Dkt. No. 36.) In preparation for the conference, Defendants’ attorneys attempted
to meet and confer with Plaintiff’s counsel to prepare a joint Rule 26(f) report. (Dkt. No.
37.) Although Plaintiff’s counsel initially responded with dates of availability, he did not
respond to later attempts to schedule a specific time to confer. Defendants’ respective
counsels agreed to meet on June 8, 2015 and invited Plaintiff’s counsel to attend.
Plaintiff’s counsel did not respond to the invitation or participate in the June 8, 2015
conference. Plaintiff’s counsel also failed to appear before the Court on June 15, 2015.
Based upon Plaintiff’s counsel’s failure to appear at the scheduling conference, the
Court issued an order to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed for
failure to prosecute. (Dkt. No. 39.) The order required a response by June 22, 2015.
Although Plaintiff communicated that he would file a response, as of this date, Plaintiff
has not responded. Accordingly, this case is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice.
See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629–33 (1962) (finding district court did not
abuse discretion in dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint where counsel failed to appear at
a pretrial conference); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Initials of Preparer

:
rf

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Page 1 of 1