Davis v. Convergent Outsourcing, Inc., 1:19-cv-00268 LJO JLT. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190513767
Visitors: 18
Filed: May 10, 2019
Latest Update: May 10, 2019
Summary: ORDER TO PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR HIS FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THIS ACTION JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . Despite that the time for the defendant to respond to this action has passed, the plaintiff has not sought default or default judgment. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 1. No later than May 31, 2019, the plaintiff SHALL show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to prosecute this action. Alternatively, he may s
Summary: ORDER TO PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR HIS FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THIS ACTION JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . Despite that the time for the defendant to respond to this action has passed, the plaintiff has not sought default or default judgment. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 1. No later than May 31, 2019, the plaintiff SHALL show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to prosecute this action. Alternatively, he may se..
More
ORDER TO PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR HIS FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THIS ACTION
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
Despite that the time for the defendant to respond to this action has passed, the plaintiff has not sought default or default judgment. Thus, the Court ORDERS:
1. No later than May 31, 2019, the plaintiff SHALL show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to prosecute this action. Alternatively, he may seek default followed by a motion for default judgment.
The failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that the Court dismiss the action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
