Bouyer v. La Pico Plaza, LLC, 2:20-cv-01514-DSF-MRW. (2020)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20200320603
Visitors: 41
Filed: Mar. 19, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 19, 2020
Summary: Order to Show Cause re Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution DALE S. FISCHER , District Judge . Generally, defendants must answer the complaint within 21 days after service or 60 days if the defendant is the United States. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1). In this case, La Pico Plaza, LLC failed to plead or otherwise defend within the relevant time. The Court orders plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before April 20, 2020 why the claims against the non-appearing defendant(s) should not be dismis
Summary: Order to Show Cause re Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution DALE S. FISCHER , District Judge . Generally, defendants must answer the complaint within 21 days after service or 60 days if the defendant is the United States. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1). In this case, La Pico Plaza, LLC failed to plead or otherwise defend within the relevant time. The Court orders plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before April 20, 2020 why the claims against the non-appearing defendant(s) should not be dismiss..
More
Order to Show Cause re Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution
DALE S. FISCHER, District Judge.
Generally, defendants must answer the complaint within 21 days after service or 60 days if the defendant is the United States. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1).
In this case, La Pico Plaza, LLC failed to plead or otherwise defend within the relevant time. The Court orders plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before April 20, 2020 why the claims against the non-appearing defendant(s) should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Failure to respond to this Order may result in sanctions, including dismissal for failure to prosecute.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
