NORMAN V. STRATEMAN

Filing 42

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: FAILURE TO PROSECUTE. Order to Show Cause Hearing set for Friday, 12/2/2016 02:00 PM. Plaintiff Show Cause Response due by 11/25/2016. The Court VACATES the hearing on defendants' motions to dismiss currently set for ** November 29, 2016,** to be reset if briefing on such motions is complete. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 11/21/16. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/21/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

DONALD NORMAN,

Case No. 16-cv-03587-YGR

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE

9
10

INTERSANGO, LLC, ET AL.,
Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Plaintiff Donald Norman brings this derivative shareholder action against defendants.

14

(Dkt. No. 35, the “FAC”.) On October 25, 2016, defendants Intersango, LLC and Patrick

15

Strateman each filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

16

(Dkt. Nos. 36, 37.) Plaintiff’s response was due on November 8, 2016, and any replies would

17

have been due on November 15, 2016. Plaintiff has yet to file a response. As a result, the Court is

18

considering dismissing plaintiff’s lawsuit for “failure to prosecute,” that is, a failure to meet

19

deadlines to keep the lawsuit moving forward.

20

Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Court should not dismiss the case

21

for failure to prosecute. The Court SETS a hearing on this Order for Friday, December 2, 2016 at

22

2:00 p.m., in the Federal Building, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California, Courtroom 1. Not later

23

than Friday, November 25, 2016, plaintiff must file either: (i) responses to the motions to

24

dismiss; or (ii) a written response to this Order to Show Cause, indicating why the case should not

25

be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Failure to comply will be deemed an admission that

26

plaintiff does not intend to prosecute, and his case will be dismissed without prejudice. If

27

compliance is complete, the Court may vacate the hearing on this Order and the plaintiff need not

28

appear. If plaintiff files responses to the motions to dismiss by November 25, 2016, defendants’

1
2
3

replies will be due seven (7) days thereafter.
The Court also VACATES the hearing on defendants’ motions to dismiss currently set for
November 29, 2016, to be reset if briefing on such motions is complete.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated: November 21, 2016

6
7

______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

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
2