Hernandez Pineda v. Lester, 8:19-cv-00605-KES. (2019)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20190802776
Visitors: 1
Filed: Jul. 31, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 31, 2019
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS KAREN E. SCOTT , Magistrate Judge . On March 29, 2019, Plaintiff Guadalupe V. Hernandez Pineda ("Plaintiff"), through counsel, filed this Petition for Writ of Mandamus action against various federal officials. The Proof of Service ("POS") declaration attached states that Defendants were served on March 29, 2019 via first class certified mail. (Dkt. 1 at 14-15.) Federal officials g
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS KAREN E. SCOTT , Magistrate Judge . On March 29, 2019, Plaintiff Guadalupe V. Hernandez Pineda ("Plaintiff"), through counsel, filed this Petition for Writ of Mandamus action against various federal officials. The Proof of Service ("POS") declaration attached states that Defendants were served on March 29, 2019 via first class certified mail. (Dkt. 1 at 14-15.) Federal officials ge..
More
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE AND TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS
KAREN E. SCOTT, Magistrate Judge.
On March 29, 2019, Plaintiff Guadalupe V. Hernandez Pineda ("Plaintiff"), through counsel, filed this Petition for Writ of Mandamus action against various federal officials. The Proof of Service ("POS") declaration attached states that Defendants were served on March 29, 2019 via first class certified mail. (Dkt. 1 at 14-15.) Federal officials generally must respond to a complaint within sixty (60) days of service. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(2).
After more than sixty days elapsed with no appearance by any Defendants, the Court issued an order to show cause ("OSC") why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to serve Defendants. (Dkt. 5.) The response to the first OSC was due by July 24, 2019. (Id.) Plaintiff failed to respond, and the July 24 deadline has now passed.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, on or before August 7, 2019, Plaintiff shall show cause why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and to comply with court-ordered deadlines.
Source: Leagle
