Great American Insurance Company v. Lynden Incorporated et al

Filing 41

MINUTE ORDER Denying Parties' 39 Stipulated Motion to Continue Trial Date by Judge Richard A Jones. See Order for Further Details. (LMK)

HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10

GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Plaintiff,

11

MINUTE ORDER
v.

12
13

LYNDEN INCORPORATED, et al.,
Defendants.

14

The clerk issues the following minute order by the authority of the Honorable

15
16

CASE NO. C14-89RAJ

Richard A. Jones, United States District Court Judge.
The court DENIES the parties’ stipulated motion to continue the trial date. Dkt.

17
18

# 39. Among other things, not all parties who have appeared in this action signed the

19

motion. 1
The stipulated motion raises more questions than it answers. The amended

20
21

complaint names 17 Defendants. Just two of them have appeared. The record contains

22

evidence that 3 of them have been served; it is silent as to the remaining 14. Plaintiff just

23

this month filed a dozen executed waivers of service dated in January 2014, six months

24

before Plaintiff filed its amended complaint. Those waivers would now appear to be

25
1

27

Counsel for Lynden Incorporated, an entity that is no longer a Defendant in this action, signed
the stipulation; Brown Line, LLC, a Defendant who employs the same counsel, did not sign the
stipulation.

28

MINUTE ORDER – 1

26

1

irrelevant, because what matters now is whether Plaintiff served its amended complaint

2

on the 17 Defendants. Plaintiff just this month sought summonses for three of the

3

Defendants, suggesting that it has waited more than nine months to begin serving its

4

amended complaint on at least some Defendants.

5

The record leaves the court with the impression that almost nothing has been done

6

to bring this action to a conclusion. Discovery has expired; the deadline for filing

7

dispositive motions has filed; and the trial date is July 13, 2015. It seems exceedingly

8

unlikely that trial will occur on that date, and the motion before the court suggests that

9

Plaintiff believes this action will resolve without trial. But, before the court can impose

10

an appropriate schedule for bringing this action to a resolution, the court needs

11

substantially better information from the Plaintiff.

12

The court orders as follows:

13

1) No later than May 5, 2015, Plaintiff shall file a statement informing the court

14

which Defendants have been served. As to any Defendant who has not been

15

served, Plaintiff shall explain its efforts to complete service and when it

16

expects to bring those efforts to completion. Plaintiff shall be specific, and

17

shall at a minimum include the dates on which it attempted service. Plaintiff

18

may also explain, to the extent it is relevant, any informal communication it

19

has had with any Defendant who has not been served.

20

2) The same statement shall include Plaintiff’s proposal for bringing this action to

21

a resolution, including an explanation of how much time is necessary for each

22

step in that process.

23

Dated this 21st day of April, 2015.

24

WILLIAM M. MCCOOL
Clerk

25

s/ Rhonda Stiles
Deputy Clerk

26
27
28

MINUTE ORDER – 2