Opinion
8:22-cv-01424-CJC-SK
12-06-2022
Azita Karbasiun v. Alejandro Mayorkas et al
PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION
HONORABLE CORMAC J. CARNEY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
It is a plaintiffs responsibility to prosecute its case diligently. That includes, where applicable, promptly (a) filing stipulations extending a defendant's time to respond to the complaint, (b) pursuing default and remedies under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 when a defendant fails to timely respond to the complaint, or (c) dismissing a case the plaintiff has chosen not to pursue for any reason.
Here, Plaintiff has filed a proof of service, yet the deadline for all defendants to respond to the Complaint has passed and Plaintiff has taken no action. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, hereby ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause in writing, no later than December 9, 2022 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. As an alternative to a written response by Plaintiff, the Court will consider as an appropriate response to this OSC the filing of one of the following on or before the above Dated:
1. Plaintiffs Request for Entry of Default as to all Defendants or Defendants' Answers;
2. A stipulation extending all Defendants' time to respond to the Complaint that complies with Local Rule 8.3, or
3. A Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (Fed. R. Civ. P. 41) as to all Defendants.
No oral argument will be heard on this matter unless ordered by the Court. The Order will stand submitted upon the filing of a timely and appropriate response. Failure to file a timely and appropriate response to this Order may result in dismissal.