Lavergne Short, et al v. Toyota Motor North America, Inc. et al

Filing 38

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER Extending Time to Respond to Order to Show Cause and Continuing Hearing on Order to Show Cause by Judge James V. Selna. The Court is cognizant that although they originally had counsel, the plaintiffs are now proceedi ng in pro per. For that reason, the Court extends the time for plaintiffs to file a response to the Order to Show Cause and/or supply a demand and completes negotiations materials to May 1, 2017. Toyota may reply no later than May 8, 2017. The hearing is continued to May 15, 2017 at 1:30 p.m. The Court strongly admonishes the plaintiffs that if they fail tp respond and/or comply with the requirements of the ISP, THE CASE WILL BE DISMISSED. (see document for details). (dro)

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

Date

SACV 11-415 JVS (FMOx)

April 19, 2017

8:10ML02151 JVS(FMOx)
Title

Lavergne Short, et al. v. Toyota Motor North America Inc., et al.
A member case IN RE: TOYOTA MOTOR CORP. UNINTENDED
ACCELERATION MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS
LIABILITY LITIGATION

Present: The
Honorable

James V. Selna
Karla J. Tunis

Not Present

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present

Not Present

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS) Order Extending Time to Respond to Order to
Show Cause and Continuing Hearing on Order to Show Cause

On March 29, 2017, the Court granted Toyota Motor North America, Inc. et al.’s (collectively
“Toyota”) unopposed motion for an order to show cause why the complaint should not be dismissed
because of the failure of plaintiffs Laverne Short et al. (collectively “plaintiffs”) to participate in the
Intensive Settlement Program (“ISP”). (SACV 11-415, Docket No. 33.) Plaintiffs were required to
respond to the Order to Show Cause no later than April 10, 2017. The Court specifically advised that
“Plaintiffs are cautioned that should they fail to respond, the case will likely be dismissed
without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), 37(b)(2)(C) and 16(f).” (Id., p. 2; bold in
original.)
Plaintiffs failed to respond to the Order to Show Cause. It appear that two of the three
plaintiffs have now submitted a demands; none has provided completed negotiations materials
(D’Auria Decl., ¶¶ 3-5.)
The Court is cognizant that although they originally had counsel, the plaintiffs are now
proceeding in pro per. For that reason, the Court extends the time for plaintiffs to file a response to
the Order to Show Cause and/or supply a demand and completes negotiations materials to May 1,
2017. Toyota may reply no later than May 8, 2017. The hearing is continued to May 15, 2017 at 1:30
p.m.
The Court strongly admonishes the plaintiffs that if they fail tp respond and/or comply
with the requirements of the ISP, THE CASE WILL BE DISMISSED.
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

kjt

Page 1 of 1