Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

DYER v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, 1:17-cv-01183-DAD-JLT. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20171121941 Visitors: 18
Filed: Nov. 20, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2017
Summary: ORDER TO PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THIS ACTION JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . On October 4, 2017, the parties filed a joint stipulation for an extension of thirty days for Ford Motor Company to file a response to Plaintiff's complaint, indicating the defendant's response would be due October 27, 2017. (Doc. 8 at 2) The Court granted the request (Doc. 9). but Ford has failed to file the responsive pleading despite that it
More

ORDER TO PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE THIS ACTION

On October 4, 2017, the parties filed a joint stipulation for an extension of thirty days for Ford Motor Company to file a response to Plaintiff's complaint, indicating the defendant's response would be due October 27, 2017. (Doc. 8 at 2) The Court granted the request (Doc. 9). but Ford has failed to file the responsive pleading despite that it is now weeks past the deadline. Despite this, the plaintiff has failed to seek entry of default. Thus, the Court ORDERS:

1. Within 10 days, the plaintiff SHALL show cause in writing why sanctions, up to an including dismissal of this action, should not be imposed for his failure to prosecute this action.

Plaintiff is advised that his failure to comply will result in a recommendation that this matter be dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer