BRISENO v. NEW CHINA EXPRESS, LLC, 2:16-cv-04639-ODW(FFM). (2017)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20170410421
Visitors: 4
Filed: Mar. 28, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE OTIS D. WRIGHT, II , District Judge . On October 17, 2016, the Court stayed this case for sixty days to allow the parties additional time to pursue settlement. (ECF No. 13.) That stay has long since expired. Accordingly, the Court orders Plaintiff Juan Briseno to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Failure to file a response by April 3, 2017, will result in dismissal of this lawsuit without prejudice without further notice. IT IS
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE OTIS D. WRIGHT, II , District Judge . On October 17, 2016, the Court stayed this case for sixty days to allow the parties additional time to pursue settlement. (ECF No. 13.) That stay has long since expired. Accordingly, the Court orders Plaintiff Juan Briseno to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Failure to file a response by April 3, 2017, will result in dismissal of this lawsuit without prejudice without further notice. IT IS S..
More
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, District Judge.
On October 17, 2016, the Court stayed this case for sixty days to allow the parties additional time to pursue settlement. (ECF No. 13.) That stay has long since expired. Accordingly, the Court orders Plaintiff Juan Briseno to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Failure to file a response by April 3, 2017, will result in dismissal of this lawsuit without prejudice without further notice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
