Casildo, et al. v. Esparza Enterprises, Inc

Filing 7

ORDER to PLAINTIFFS to SHOW CAUSE Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed for the Failure to Comply with the Court's Orders and to Prosecute this Action; ORDER Continuing Scheduling Conference, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 7/13/2017. Show Cause Response due by 7/21/2017. Initial Scheduling Conference CONTINUED to 8/21/2017 at 08:30 AM in Bakersfield, 510 19th Street 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

OLGA CASILDO, et al.,

12

Plaintiffs,

13
14
15

v.
ESPARZA ENTERPRISES, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:17-cv-00601 LJO JLT
ORDER TO PLAINTIFFS TO SHOW CAUSE
WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED
FOR THE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE
COURT’S ORDERS AND TO PROSECUTE THIS
ACTION; ORDER CONTINUING SCHEDULING
CONFERENCE

16
17

On April 28, 2017, the plaintiffs initiated this action for themselves and on behalf of a

18

prospective class. (Doc. 1) On May 1, 2017, the Court issued the summons (Doc. 4) and its order

19

setting the mandatory scheduling conference to occur on July 26, 2017. (Doc. 5) In its order setting

20

the mandatory scheduling conference, the Court advised counsel:

21
22
23
24

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 summons
and complaint may result in the imposition of sanctions, including the dismissal of unserved
defendants.

25
26

(Doc. 5 at 1-2, emphasis added) Despite this, the plaintiffs have not filed a proof of service of

27

the summons and complaint as to the defendant. Nevertheless, on May 22, 2017, the parties stipulated

28
1

1

to allow the defendant until June 19, 2017 to file a responsive pleading (Doc. 6); this has not

2

occurred. Therefore, the Court ORDERS,

3

1.

No later than July 21, 2017, the plaintiffs SHALL show cause why sanctions should

4

not be imposed for the failure to serve and file proofs of service on the defendants. Alternatively, the

5

plaintiff may file proofs of service;

6

2.

Due the failure of the defendant to appear and the lack of proof of service which would

7

prevent entry of default, the scheduling conference, currently set on June 26, 2017 is CONTINUED to

8

August 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m.

9
10

Plaintiff is reminded of the service obligations under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Failure to comply
may result in the imposition of sanctions, including the dismissal of unserved defendants.

11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 13, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2