LHF Productions, Inc. v. Does

Filing 35

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that the pending order to show cause 27 is hereby DISCHARGED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 34 Plaintiff's motion for a hearing is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 5/12/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
10
11
12
13
14

)
)
Plaintiff(s),
)
)
vs.
)
)
BUDDY BARNUM, et al.,
)
)
Defendant(s).
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:16-cv-01803-JAD-NJK
ORDER
(Docket Nos. 27, 34)

15

Pending before the Court is the order for Plaintiff to show cause why certain defendants should not

16

be dismissed for lack of service and failure to prosecute. Docket No. 27.1 In particular, that order noted

17

that the amended complaint continued to identify 17 Doe Defendants despite more than eight months in

18

which Plaintiff could conduct discovery, and further that no action had been taken against four named

19

Defendants who had been served but had not yet appeared. Id. Plaintiff has now filed a response, along

20

with a motion for a hearing. Docket Nos. 33, 34.

21

Following the issuance of the order to show cause, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the remaining Doe

22

Defendants. Docket No. 28. As such, that issue is now moot. Also following the issuance of the order to

23

show cause, Plaintiff has moved forward with its claims against the named Defendants who have been

24

served but have not appeared by obtaining Clerk’s defaults. Docket No. 31. Given the circumstances, the

25

Court will discharge the order to show cause with respect to these named Defendants.

26
1

27
28

A second order to show cause was issued in this case. Docket No. 26. Plaintiff was given an
extension to respond to that order to show cause, Docket No. 32, and it remains pending. This order does
not resolve the issues raised therein.

1

For the foregoing reasons, the pending order to show cause at Docket No. 27 is hereby

2

DISCHARGED. Moreover, the Court finds a hearing unnecessary, so Plaintiff’s motion for a hearing at

3

Docket No. 34 is DENIED. See Local Rule 78-1.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED

5

Dated: May 12, 2017

6
7

________________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

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