From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bailey v. Big Elephant Inv.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Nov 18, 2022
CV 22-3818 PA (RAOx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2022)

Opinion

CV 22-3818 PA (RAOx)

11-18-2022

Mister Bailey v. Big Elephant Investment, LLC et al

Patricia Kim


Patricia Kim

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE PERCY ANDERSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Proceedings: Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal For Lack Of Prosecution

Generally, defendants must answer the complaint within 21 days after service (60 days if the defendant is the United States). Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(1).

In the present case, it appears that this time period has not been met. Accordingly, the court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before December 2, 2022, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Pursuant to Rule 78 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court finds that this matter is appropriate for submission without oral argument. The Order to Show Cause will stand submitted upon the filing of plaintiff's response. Failure to respond to this Order may result in the imposition of sanctions, including but not limited to dismissal of the complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Bailey v. Big Elephant Inv.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Nov 18, 2022
CV 22-3818 PA (RAOx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2022)
Case details for

Bailey v. Big Elephant Inv.

Case Details

Full title:Mister Bailey v. Big Elephant Investment, LLC et al

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Nov 18, 2022

Citations

CV 22-3818 PA (RAOx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2022)