Lee v. McAllister Olivarius

Filing 19

Order by Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros terminating as moot 18 Motion to Continue Case Management Conference and Enlarge Time to File Case Management Statement; Directing Plaintiff to File Case Management Statement by August 1, 2024.(ljclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/3/2024)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JANE LEE, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 Case No. 23-cv-04561-LJC v. MCALLISTER OLIVARIUS, Defendant. ORDER TERMINATING AS MOOT MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND ENLARGE TIME TO FILE CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT; DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT BY AUGUST 1, 2024 Re: ECF No. 18 13 14 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Jane Lee’s Motion to Continue Case Management 15 Conference and Enlarge Time to File Case Management Statement (Motion). ECF No. 18. Ms. 16 Lee’s Motion is dated June 7, 2024. Id. at 2. In the Motion, she requested that the June 13, 2024 17 Case Management Conference be continued to June 25, 2024, or a date thereafter convenient for 18 the Court, and that the Case Management Statement deadline be extended to seven days before the 19 continued Case Management Conference. Id. However, Ms. Lee mailed her Motion to the 20 undersigned’s chambers as a chambers copy. This is not how documents are manually filed in this 21 District under the Civil Local Rules. A party that wishes to manually file documents in a civil 22 case must deliver the documents to the Clerk’s Office so that they can be entered and filed on the 23 case docket. See Civ. L.R. 5(e). Because the Motion was not delivered properly to the Clerk’s 24 Office, it was not entered and filed on the case docket until July 1, 2024. ECF No. 18. By this 25 point, the Court had already held the June 13, 2024 Case Management Conference, and Ms. Lee 26 did not appear. ECF No. 17. The courtroom deputy tried multiple times to give Ms. Lee a call, 27 but she did not answer, and her voicemail was not available to leave a message. Id. The Court set 28 another Case Management Conference for August 15, 2024, at 1:30 p.m. via Zoom. Id. The United States District Court Northern District of California 1 Court also indicated that it may issue an order to show cause as to why this case should not be 2 dismissed for failure to prosecute. Id. 3 The Motion is hereby TERMINATED as moot. At the prior Case Management 4 Conference, Ms. Lee indicated that she was interested in becoming an e-filer. ECF No. 15. The 5 Court encourages Ms. Lee to follow through with that process. Procedures and instructions for 6 becoming an e-filer and using the Court’s ECF system are available at 7 https://cand.uscourts.gov/cases-e-filing/cm-ecf/. Ms. Lee is admonished that if she wishes to 8 continue manually filing documents in this case, she must follow the Civil Local Rules and the 9 proper procedures for manual filing. Ms. Lee is also admonished that she is obligated to appear 10 for all scheduled Court hearings and conferences, even if she has requested a continuance, until 11 the Court rules on the pending request for a continuance. 12 Finally, the Court is concerned that Ms. Lee has yet to serve Defendant with summons and 13 a copy of the complaint pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules Civil Procedures, especially since 14 this action has been pending for more than nine months. The Court understands that Defendant is 15 domiciled in the United Kingdom, and that Rule 4 does not set a firm deadline for service on a 16 foreign defendant. Nevertheless, by August 1, 2024, in advance of the August 15, 2024 Case 17 Management Conference, Ms. Lee shall file a Case Management Statement that explains in detail 18 the steps she has taken to serve Defendant and what progress has been made to effectuate service. 19 The Court has not yet issued an order to show cause as to why the case should not be dismissed 20 for failure to prosecute, but it does seek to ensure that Ms. Lee is taking appropriate steps to 21 advance her case.1 22 // 23 // 24 25 26 27 28 1 The Court notes that it previously issued an Order to Show Cause for failure to prosecute on December 11, 2023. ECF No. 9. Ms. Lee filed a response to the Order to Show Cause on December 26, 2023, where she explained that Rule 4(m)’s 90-day deadline did not apply to this case, given Defendant’s domicile in Maidenhead, England. ECF No. 10. The Court ordered Ms. Lee to file a Case Management Statement by January 29, 2024 providing an update on her efforts to effectuate service, and it held an Initial Case Management Conference on February 8, 2024 to discuss the issue of service. ECF Nos. 12, 13, 15. 2 1 2 3 4 If the Court determines that Ms. Lee is failing to prosecute her case, then it may issue a report and recommendation that the action be dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 3, 2024 5 6 LISA J. CISNEROS United States Magistrate Judge 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?