ORDER

THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.

This matter comes before the court after a review of the court file and pursuant to NECivR 41.2, which states in pertinent part: "At any time, a case not being prosecuted with reasonable diligence may be dismissed for lack of prosecution."

In this case the complaint was filed on August 7, 2015. See Filing No. 1. Also on August 7, 2015, the plaintiff sought and received summonses for the defendants. See Filing Nos. 3-4, 6. On August 12, 2014, the plaintiff filed notice of serving both defendants on August 10, 2015. See Filing Nos. 7-8. On August 26, 2015, the plaintiff filed a second notice indicating service on the defendant Sharyl A. Mason on August 22, 2015. See Filing No. 10. The plaintiff has taken no other action against the defendants. It remains the plaintiff's duty to go forward in prosecuting the case against the defendants. The plaintiff may, for example, file a motion for clerk's entry of default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55 and NECivR 55.1(a) or voluntarily dismiss the nonparticipating defendants, as appropriate. Under the circumstances, the plaintiff must make a showing of good cause for failure to prosecute the defendants or the action must be dismissed against them. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

The plaintiff has until the close of business on October 9, 2015, to show cause why this case should not be dismissed against the defendants for failure to prosecute or take some other appropriate action.