Prudent Trust Company Limited et al v. Niania Dabo Touray et al

Filing 19

IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Ronald S.W. Lew. The file in this case lacks the papers that would show it is being timely prosecuted, as reflected below. Accordingly, the Cour t, on its own motion, hereby orders plaintiff (s) to show cause in writing no later than April 10, 2015, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. As an alternative to a written response by plaintiff(s), the Court will accept o ne of the following, if it is filed on or before the above date, as evidence that the matter is being prosecuted diligently: Defendant/s Answer/s to the Complaint or Plaintiff's Request for Entry of Default on defendant/s. No oral argument of t his matter will be heard unless ordered by the Court. The Order will stand submitted upon the filing of a responsive pleading or motion on or before the date upon which a response by plaintiff(s) is due. Failure to respond may result in sanctions and/or be deemed consent for the dismissal of this action. Plaintiff is to serve notice of this Order on all remaining named parties in this action who have not appeared. (jre)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV 14-8965 RSWL (MANx)

Title

Prudent Trust Company Limited et al v. Niania Dabo Touray et al

Present: The
Honorable

Date

March 31, 2015

RONALD S.W. LEW, Senior U.S. District Judge
Joseph Remigio

n/a

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present

Not Present

Proceedings:

IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION

It is the responsibility of plaintiff to respond promptly to all Orders and to prosecute the action
diligently, including filing proofs of service and stipulations extending time to respond. If necessary,
plaintiff(s) must also pursue Rule 55 remedies promptly upon default of any defendant. All stipulations
affecting the progress of the case must be approved by the Court, Local Rule 7-1.
The file in this case lacks the papers that would show it is being timely prosecuted, as reflected
below. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, hereby orders plaintiff (s) to show cause in writing
no later than April 10, 2015, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution.
As an alternative to a written response by plaintiff(s), the Court will accept one of the following,
if it is filed on or before the above date, as evidence that the matter is being prosecuted diligently.
•

Defendant/s Answer/s to the Complaint or Plaintiff’s Request for Entry of Default
on defendant/s.

No oral argument of this matter will be heard unless ordered by the Court. The Order will stand
submitted upon the filing of a responsive pleading or motion on or before the date upon which a
response by plaintiff(s) is due. Failure to respond may result in sanctions and/or be deemed consent for
the dismissal of this action.
Plaintiff is to serve notice of this Order on all remaining named parties in this action who have not
appeared.

:
Initials of Preparer
CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

00

JRE
Page 1 of 1