In the Matter of a Petition by Ricci & Kruse Lumber Company, 18-mc-80021-TSH. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20181026b29
Visitors: 24
Filed: Oct. 25, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 25, 2018
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE THOMAS S. HIXSON , Magistrate Judge . Petitioner Ricci & Kruse Lumber Company has submitted two unsuccessful petitions requesting authorization to depose Reginald Ricci to perpetuate his testimony pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 27. ECF Nos. 1, 3. The petitions were denied in orders dated February 6, 2018, and March 19, 2018, ECF Nos. 2, 6. The March 19 denial allowed the petitioner "one final opportunity to amend the petition, on the condition that they can
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE THOMAS S. HIXSON , Magistrate Judge . Petitioner Ricci & Kruse Lumber Company has submitted two unsuccessful petitions requesting authorization to depose Reginald Ricci to perpetuate his testimony pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 27. ECF Nos. 1, 3. The petitions were denied in orders dated February 6, 2018, and March 19, 2018, ECF Nos. 2, 6. The March 19 denial allowed the petitioner "one final opportunity to amend the petition, on the condition that they can d..
More
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
THOMAS S. HIXSON, Magistrate Judge.
Petitioner Ricci & Kruse Lumber Company has submitted two unsuccessful petitions requesting authorization to depose Reginald Ricci to perpetuate his testimony pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 27. ECF Nos. 1, 3. The petitions were denied in orders dated February 6, 2018, and March 19, 2018, ECF Nos. 2, 6. The March 19 denial allowed the petitioner "one final opportunity to amend the petition, on the condition that they can demonstrate full compliance with Rule 27." ECF No. 6. That was seven months ago. In the seven months since, the petitioner has filed nothing.
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS Ricci & Kruse Lumber Company to show cause why this matter should not be closed. Petitioner shall file a response by November 7, 2018. Notice is hereby provided that failure to file a written response will be deemed an admission that Petitioner does not intend to refile, and the case will be closed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
