Hopson v. La Contenta Plaza, A California Limited Partnership et al

Filing 9

ORDER 7 for continuance signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 3/4/2015. Since this case is not ready to be scheduled, th Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference is RE-SET for 6/22/2015 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GEB). A Joint Status Report sh all be filed no later than 14 days prior to Conference Hearing. Further, plaintiff is notified under Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that failure to serve defendants Gerald Walk and Carol Walk with process within 120-day period pres cribed in Rule may result in unserved defendants being dismissed. To avoid dismissal, on or before 5/1/2015, plaintiff shall file Proof of Service for these defendants or a sufficient explanation why service was not completed within prescribed service period. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

CYNTHIA HOPSON,

8

Plaintiff,

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

No. 2:14-cv-02988-GEB-DAD

v.
LA CONTENTA PLAZA, a
California Limited
Partnership; MARK TWAIN
ST. JOSEPH’S HEALTHCARE
CORPORATION, dba Family
Medical Center Valley
Springs; GERALD WALK, dba
Pizza Factory; CAROL WALK,
dba Pizza Factory; and DOES
1-10, inclusive,

ORDER CONTINUING STATUS
(PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)
CONFERENCE; FED. R. CIV. P. 4(M)
NOTICE

Defendants.

16
17
18

This case is not ready to be scheduled. Therefore, the

19

Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference scheduled for hearing on

20

March 9, 2015, is continued to June 22, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. A

21

joint status report shall be filed no later than fourteen (14)

22

days prior to the Status Conference.
Further, Plaintiff is notified under Rule 4(m) of the

23
24

Federal

25

Defendants Gerald Walk and Carol Walk with process within the 120

26

day period prescribed in that Rule may result in the unserved

27

defendants being dismissed. To avoid dismissal, on or before May

28

1,

2015,

Rules

of

Plaintiff

Civil

shall

Procedure

file
1

that

proof

of

failure

service

to

for

serve

these

1

defendants

2

completed within Rule 4(m)’s prescribed service period.

3
4

or

a

sufficient

explanation

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 4, 2015

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

why

service

was

not