Sandra Garybo et al v. Leonardo Bros et al

Filing 4

ORDER to PLAINTIFFS to SHOW CAUSE Why the Matter Should Not Be Dismissed or Sanctions Imposed Due to Their Failure to Prosecute the Action and to Obey a Court Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 12/28/2015. Show Cause Response due by 1/11/2016. Status Conference re Consent / Initial Scheduling Conference CONTINUED to 2/12/2016 at 08:30 AM in Bakersfield at 510 19th Street (JLT) before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SANDRA GARYBO, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

12
13
14
15

v.
LEONARDO BROS., et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-01487 --- JLT
ORDER TO PLAINTIFFS TO SHOW CAUSE
WHY THE MATTER SHOULD NOT BE
DISMISSED OR SANCTIONS IMPOSED DUE
TO THEIR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THE
ACTION AND TO OBEY A COURT ORDER

On September 30, 2015, Plaintiffs initiated this action in which they claim that Defendants

18

committed various labor law violations. (Doc. 1) They seek to certify a class of members similarly

19

situated. Id. On October 1, 2015, the Court issued summonses. (Doc. 2) However, Plaintiffs have

20

failed to a file proof of service as to any defendant.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Notably, on October 1, 2015, the Court issued its Order Setting Mandatory Scheduling
Conference. (Doc. 8) In it, the Court ordered,
The Court is unable to conduct a scheduling conference until defendants have been
served with the summons and complaint. Accordingly, plaintiff(s) shall diligently
pursue service of summons and complaint and dismiss those defendants against whom
plaintiff(s) will not pursue claims. Plaintiff(s) shall promptly file proofs of service of
the summons and complaint so the Court has a record of service. Counsel are referred
to F.R.Civ.P., Rule 4 regarding the requirement of timely service of the complaint.
Failure to timely serve the summons and complaint may result in the imposition of
sanctions, including the dismissal of unserved defendants.
(Doc. 8 at 1-2) The order warns, “SHOULD COUNSEL OR A PARTY APPEARING PRO SE . . .

28
1

1

FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIONS AS SET FORTH ABOVE, AN EX PARTE

2

HEARING MAY BE HELD AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL, DEFAULT, OR OTHER

3

APPROPRIATE JUDGMENT MAY BE ENTERED, OR SANCTIONS, INCLUDING

4

CONTEMPT OF COURT, MAY BE IMPOSED AND/OR ORDERED.”

5

Therefore, the Court ORDERS:

6

1.

No later than January 11, 201, Plaintiffs SHALL show cause in writing why the matter

7

should not be dismissed or sanctions imposed due to their failure to prosecute it. Alternatively, by

8

January 11, 2016, Plaintiff may file proofs of service of the summonses and complaint on the

9

defendants;

10
11

2.

The status conference re: consent/initial scheduling conference is continued to

February 12, 2016 at 8:30 a.m. Appearances via the CourtCall service are authorized.

12
13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

December 28, 2015

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2