Workers Comp Solutions LLC, Liquidating Trust et al v. Daniel Romanski et al

Filing 50

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. The clerk shall close this file. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 10/24/2017. (hrllc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

WORKERS COMP SOLUTIONS LLC,
LIQUIDATING TRUST,

13
14
15
16

Plaintiff,

Case No.5:16-cv-06084-HRL
ORDER DISMISSING CASE

v.
DANIEL ROMANSKI, et al.,
Defendants.

17
18

Earlier this year, plaintiff filed for bankruptcy. Although not required to do so, the court

19

stayed this matter for several months because plaintiff’s counsel, Bruce Grego, advised that he had

20

only limited authority to act in this lawsuit, and for all practical purposes, plaintiff was without

21

legal representation. The court held a series of status conferences at which the parties said they

22

had no material developments to report.

23

This court subsequently granted attorney Grego’s motion for leave to withdraw as

24

plaintiff’s counsel, subject only to the condition that papers could continue to be served on him for

25

forwarding purposes. (Dkt. 43). In bold typeface, the court’s order told plaintiff that “it may not

26

appear pro se or through its corporate officers but must retain new counsel forthwith to represent

27

itself in this lawsuit.” (Id. at 1). Further, the order set an October 24, 2017 status conference and

28

advised: “If new counsel has not made an appearance for plaintiff by that time, then absent a

1

showing of good cause, the court will have this case dismissed for lack of prosecution.” (Id. at 2).

2

The court’s records show that the order was mailed to the bankruptcy trustee and counsel at the

3

addresses identified by Grego in his motion to withdraw. (Dkt. 44).
At the October 24 conference, Grego and defense counsel appeared. There was no

4
5

appearance by anyone connected with the bankruptcy proceedings, and no one has otherwise

6

entered an appearance to pursue these proceedings on plaintiff’s behalf. Neither Grego nor

7

defense counsel had anything new to report. Finding no good cause to keep this matter open, this

8

court now dismisses this case for failure to prosecute.1 The clerk shall close this file.
SO ORDERED.

9
10

Dated: October 24, 2017

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
HOWARD R. LLOYD
United States Magistrate Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1

26
27
28

All parties that have appeared have consented that all proceedings in this matter may be heard
and finally adjudicated by the undersigned. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c); Fed. R. Civ. P. 73. There is no
indication that the other named defendant has been served. Unserved defendants are not deemed
to be “parties” to the action within the rules requiring consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction.
Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d 530, 532 (5th Cir. 1995); Merino v. Saxon Mortgage, Inc., No. C1005584, 2011 WL 794988 at *1, n. 1 (N.D. Cal., Mar. 1, 2011) (Laporte, J.).
2