John R. Chase v. Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. et al

Filing 43

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: FAILURE TO PROSECUTE by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to why the Court should not dismiss Plaintiff's case against the Law Offices of Lez Zieve for failure toprosecute. See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 62933 (1962). Plaintiffsresponse to this Order must be filed no later than 4:00 p.m. on Friday, April 1, 2016. If Plaintiff does not respond to this Order, the Court will dismiss the case against the Law Offices of Les Zieve, and close the case in its entirety. IT IS SO ORDERED. (rfi)

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

CV 15-09224-BRO (AGRx)

Title

JOHN R. CHASE V. RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC. ET AL

Date

March 28, 2016

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 TO SHOW CAUSE
RE: FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
Plaintiff John R. Chase (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action in the Los Angeles
Superior Court against Defendants Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. (“RCS”), Ocwen
Loan, LLC (“Ocwen”), and the Law Offices of Les Zieve. On March 28, 2016, this
Court dismissed Plaintiff’s claims against RCS and Ocwen with prejudice. (Dkt. No. 42)
Plaintiff’s original complaint, his First Amended Complaint, and Second Amended
Complaint, name the Law Offices of Les Zieve as a defendant in this case. (Dkt. Nos. 11, 8, 26.) There is no evidence before this Court that Plaintiff has served the Law Offices
of Les Zieve with the complaint and summons at any time. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)
(requiring plaintiffs to serve summons and a copy of the complaint).
Nor does any version of Plaintiff’s complaint contain a single factual allegation
pertaining to the Law Offices of Les Zieve, other than to state “[u]pon information and
belief, Defendant LAW OFFICES OF LES ZIEVE (‘Les Zieve’), is a business
organization of unknown form doing business in the State of California.” (Dkt. No. 1-1
¶ 4; Dkt. No. 8 ¶ 5; Dkt. No. 26 ¶ 5.) See Henderson v. Visa USA, Inc., 56 F. App’x 355,
at *1 (9th Cir. 2003) (unpublished) (“The district court also properly dismissed the claims
against [certain defendants] because [plaintiff’s] amended complaint . . . contained no
allegations against these defendants.”); Silicon Knights, Inc. v. Crystal Dynamics, Inc.,
983 F.Supp. 1303, 1308 (N.D. Cal. 1997) (“[C]ourts have consistently held that, where
the complaint names a defendant in the caption but contains no allegations indicating
how the defendant violated the law or injured the plaintiff, a motion to dismiss in regard
to that defendant should be granted.” (quoting Morabito v. Blum, 528 F.Supp. 252, 262
(S.D.N.Y. 1981))).
CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

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

CV 15-09224-BRO (AGRx)

Title

JOHN R. CHASE V. RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC. ET AL

Date

March 28, 2016

Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to why the Court
should not dismiss Plaintiff’s case against the Law Offices of Lez Zieve for failure to
prosecute. See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629–33 (1962). Plaintiff’s
response to this Order must be filed no later than 4:00 p.m. on Friday, April 1, 2016.
If Plaintiff does not respond to this Order, the Court will dismiss the case against the Law
Offices of Les Zieve, and close the case in its entirety.
:

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

rf

Page 2 of 2