ORDER

ROY B. DALTON, Jr., District Judge.

This cause is before the Court on its own motion.

Plaintiff filed this action on February 17, 2015. (Doc. 1.) To date, Plaintiff has not served Defendant, in violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). On June 30, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause as to why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. (Doc. 8 (citing Local Rule 3.10).) In response, Plaintiff represented that it has been negotiating with Defendant "for several months" in an effort to resolve the parties' dispute "without the need for further Court intervention." (Doc. 9, pp. 1-2.) On that basis, Plaintiff argues that service should not be required and this action should essentially be stayed pending settlement negotiations. (See id. at 2.)

The Court disagrees. United States District Court is not a depository for parties to use for a placeholder in the management of their disputes. Once a litigant files suit, the Court has an obligation to ensure that the suit continuously proceeds toward a "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 1; see also Local Rule 1.01(b) (same). That obligation remains in place even during the pendency of settlement negotiations.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff is DIRECTED to file proof of service or a notice of voluntary dismissal on or before August 7, 2015. Failure to do so will result in the Court dismissing this action sua sponte and without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED.