From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hann v. Pitchford

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 10, 2024
5:23-cv-02381-SSS-SHKx (C.D. Cal. Jun. 10, 2024)

Opinion

5:23-cv-02381-SSS-SHKx

06-10-2024

Gary S. Hann v. Wallace P. Pitchford, et al.


Present: The Honorable SUNSHINE S. SYKES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CIVIL MINUTES- GENERAL

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) Order to Show Cause re Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution

Absent a showing of good cause, an action must be dismissed without prejudice if the summons and complaint are not served on a Defendant within 90 days after the complaint is filed. Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 4(m).

In the present case, it appears that Plaintiff has not served the summons and complaint on one or more Defendants. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, hereby orders Plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before July 1, 2024, why this action should not be dismissed, with respect to Defendant Rami Hjazi, who has not been served, 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. This Order to Show Cause will be discharged if Plaintiff files, before the deadline set forth above, a proof of service of the summons and complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Hann v. Pitchford

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 10, 2024
5:23-cv-02381-SSS-SHKx (C.D. Cal. Jun. 10, 2024)
Case details for

Hann v. Pitchford

Case Details

Full title:Gary S. Hann v. Wallace P. Pitchford, et al.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jun 10, 2024

Citations

5:23-cv-02381-SSS-SHKx (C.D. Cal. Jun. 10, 2024)