Richard Casiano Sr et al v. Deutsche Bank National Trust et al
Filing
109
IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge David O. Carter, WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION: This Order is issued pursuant to FRCP 4(m)which requires that plaintiff(s) serve the summons and complaint upon all defendants within 120 days after filing the complaint. The Court may dismiss the action prior to the 120 days, however, if plaintiff(s) has/have not diligently prosecuted the action. The file in this case lacks the papers that would show it is being timely pro secuted, as reflected below. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, hereby orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing no later than May 18, 2012, why this action should not be dismissed as to all remaining defendants 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. (See document for further details.) (rla)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.
Date
ED CV 09-02124-DOC (OPx)
Title
May 4, 2012
Richard Casiano, Sr., et al. -v- Deutsche Bank National Trust, et al.
Present: The
Honorable
David O. Carter, U.S. District Court Judge
D. Beard for J. Barrera
Not Present
n/a
Deputy Clerk
Court Reporter / Recorder
Tape No.
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
This Order is issued pursuant to FRCP 4(m), which requires that plaintiff(s) serve the summons and
complaint upon all defendants within 120 days after filing the complaint. The Court may dismiss the action
prior to the 120 days, however, if plaintiff(s) has/have not diligently prosecuted the action.
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 May 18, 2012, why this action should not be dismissed as to all remaining defendants 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.
•
Proofs of service of the Summons and Complaint
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.
:
Initials of Preparer
CV-90 (06/04)
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
db for jb
Page 1 of 1
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?