From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Andres v. Entrepreneurial Corp. Grp.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Sep 9, 2022
8:22-cv-00739-CJC-KES (C.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2022)

Opinion

8:22-cv-00739-CJC-KES

09-09-2022

Lynne I. Andres et al v. Entrepreneurial Corporate Group et al

Rolls Royce Paschal


Rolls Royce Paschal

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

PRESENT: HONORABLE CORMAC J. CARNEY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION

Plaintiffs are responsible for prosecuting their actions diligently and complying with Court orders. The Court's Order Regarding Prosecution of Certain Cases Under the Americans with Disabilities Act states that “[p]roofs of service for all defendants must be filed within 95 days of the filing of the case absent a previously approved extension of time by the Court or a motion or responsive pleading by all defendants.” (Dkt. 11 [hereinafter the “Order”] at 2 [emphases in original].) The Order further admonishes that “failure to comply with this Order in a particular case will result in a dismissal for lack of prosecution.” (Id. at 3.)

Plaintiff filed this case on March 31, 2022. Although more than 95 days have passed since that date and the Court granted plaintiffs' ex parte application of extension of time to serve the summons and complaint in this action to, and including, September 7, 2022, Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service on any defendant. The Court therefore DISMISSES this action for lack of prosecution.


Summaries of

Andres v. Entrepreneurial Corp. Grp.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Sep 9, 2022
8:22-cv-00739-CJC-KES (C.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2022)
Case details for

Andres v. Entrepreneurial Corp. Grp.

Case Details

Full title:Lynne I. Andres et al v. Entrepreneurial Corporate Group et al

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Sep 9, 2022

Citations

8:22-cv-00739-CJC-KES (C.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2022)