Meineke Car Care Centers, Inc. et al v. Abomb Results, LLC et al

Filing 17

ORDER that the parties are expected to follow this Courts orders and are advised to attend to their cases conscientiously. Signed by District Judge Frank D. Whitney on 4/10/2013. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(blf)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. 3:12-CV-00760-FDW-DSC
MEINEKE CAR CARE CENTERS,
INC. & ECONOLUBE N’TUNE, INC.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
ABOMB RESULTS, LLC, MELISSA
ORTIZ & ADAM REICH,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Meineke Car Care Centers, Inc. and
EconoLube N’Tune, Inc.’s (“Plaintiffs’”) Response to the Court’s Order to Show Cause. (Doc.
No. 15). For the below reasons, the Court finds this Response adequately addresses the Court’s
concerns, but also cautions the parties that they are expected to comply with the Court’s orders
and are advised to pursue their cases diligently.
Plaintiffs originally filed this case in this Court on November 14, 2012. On April 3,
2013, Plaintiffs were ordered to show cause by April 17, 2013 why they failed to complete
service on Defendant Abomb Results, LLC (“Defendant Abomb”) as required by the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. No. 13). Plaintiffs responded that they had, in fact, served
Defendant Abomb on January 30, 2013, but had not submitted proof of service to the Court.
(Doc. No. 15). From the Proof of Service submitted by Plaintiffs (Doc. No. 14), it is clear that
the summons was served on January 30, 2013. However, given the date of service, it is now also
clear that Defendant Abomb’s answer was due on February 20, 2013. As of the date of this
Order, no answer has been received from Defendant Abomb by this Court.
Despite the lapsed due date for Defendant Abomb’s answer, Plaintiffs have not sought an

entry of default from the Clerk’s Office. As such, the Court now notes that multiple parties in
this case have failed to make proper filings and/or take steps to move the case forward. The
Court finds this troubling. Accordingly, while Plaintiffs’ Response to this Court’s Order to
Show Cause is satisfactory, the parties are warned that they are expected to follow this Court’s
orders and are advised to attend to their cases conscientiously.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Signed: April 10, 2013