Marlen Medina v. County of Los Angeles et al

Filing 18

MINUTES IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Percy Anderson. Accordingly, the Court hereby discharges the Order to Show Cause. (See document for further details). (aco)

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

CV 24-5277 PA (MAAx)

Title

Marlen Medina v. County of Los Angeles, et al.

Present: The Honorable

Date

September 25, 2024

PERCY ANDERSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Gabriela Garcia

Not Reported

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

None

None

Proceedings:

Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal For Lack Of Prosecution

On August 28, 2024, the Court issued an order to show cause why this action should not
be dismissed for lack of prosecution. (“Order to Show Cause”). (Docket No. 14.) Generally,
defendants must answer the complaint within 21 days after service . Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1). In
the present case, however, it appeared that this time period had not been met. On August 28,
2024, Defendants County of Los Angeles, Karen Fletcher, Guillermo Viera Rosa, Kevin Woods,
Felicia Cotton, Luis Dominguez, Michael Solis, and Julio Avila filed an answer to the First
Amended Complaint. (Docket No. 15.) On August 29, 2024, Plaintiff Marlen Medina also filed
a Response to the Court’s Order to Show Cause, supported by a declaration from her counsel.
(Docket No. 16.)
Accordingly, the Court hereby discharges the Order to Show Cause.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 1