Opinion
SA CV 20-0620 FMO (JDEx)
05-31-2022
Dina Kourda, et al. v. David Salinas, et al.
Present The Honorable Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order Re: Responses to Order to Show Cause
Having reviewed and considered the parties' responses to the court's Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions or Dismissal (Dkt. 51, “OSC”), the court concludes as follows. In plaintiffs' response to the OSC, they “suggest that it may make sense for judicial economy to transfer the present case to the Southern District [of California] so that it may be heard with the other cases pending there.” (Dkt. 54, Plaintiffs' Response to Order to Show Cause at 3). However, if plaintiffs wish to transfer this case to another district, they may file either a stipulation with defendants or a motion to transfer. Under either approach, plaintiffs must establish that transfer is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). See Jones v GNC Franchising, Inc., 211 F.3d 495, 498 (9th Cir. 2000) (setting forth the factors for transfer of venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)). Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. If plaintiffs wish to transfer this case to another district, they shall file either a stipulation with defendants or a motion to transfer no later than June 15, 2022.
2. In accordance with the deadlines set forth in the Court's Order of May 14, 2020 (Dkt. 40), the parties shall file the next joint status report no later than June 15, 2022.
3. Failure to submit a joint status report by the deadline set forth above may result in the imposition of sanctions and/or dismissal of this action for lack of prosecution. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388 (1962); Pagtalunan v Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 909 (2003).
4. The Court's Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions or Dismissal (Dkt. 51) is hereby discharged.