Seiko Epson Corporation, a Japan corporation et al v. Prinko Image Co. USA, Inc.

Filing 18

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. The Court, on its own motion, orders Plaintiff(s) to show cause, in writing, on or before August 3, 2017, why this action should not be dismissed for l ack of prosecution. Pursuant to Rule 78 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court finds that this matter is appropriate for submission without oral argument. The Order to Show Cause will stand submitted upon the filing of Plaintiff(s) response. Failure to respond to this Order to Show Cause will be deemed consent to the dismissal of the action. (iv)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No.:

Title:

CV 17-04501-AB (JCx)

Date:

July 20, 2017

Seiko Epson Corporation, a Japan corporation et al v. Prinko Image Co. USA, Inc.

Present: The Honorable

ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR., United States District Judge

Carla Badirian

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter

Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s):

Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s):

None Appearing

None Appearing

Proceedings:

[In Chambers] Order To Show Cause Regarding Dismissal for Lack of
Prosecution

Plaintiff(s) are ORDERED to show cause why this case should not be dismissed, for lack of prosecution.
Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626 (1962) (Court has inherent power to dismiss for lack of prosecution
on its own motion).
In the present case, it appears that one or more of these time periods has not been met.
Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, orders Plaintiff(s) to show cause, in writing, on or before
August 3, 2017, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Pursuant to Rule 78 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court finds that this matter is appropriate for submission without
oral argument. The Order to Show Cause will stand submitted upon the filing of Plaintiff(s) response.
Failure to respond to this Order to Show Cause will be deemed consent to the dismissal of the action.
Defendant(s) Prinko Image Co. USA, Inc. did not answer the complaint, yet Plaintiff(s)
have failed to request entry of default, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Plaintiff(s) can
satisfy this order by seeking entry of default or by dismissing the complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90 (12/02)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Initials of Deputy Clerk CB