From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Murugaiyan v. Bank

United States District Court, Northern District of California
May 17, 2024
23-cv-04871-AMO (N.D. Cal. May. 17, 2024)

Opinion

23-cv-04871-AMO

05-17-2024

SENTHIL MOHAN MURUGAIYAN, Plaintiff, v. ALLY BANK, Defendant.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

ARACELI MARTINEZ-OLGUIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On April 4, 2024, this Court adopted Chief Magistrate Judge Ryu's Report and Recommendation dismissing pro se plaintiff Senthil Mohan Murugaiyan's complaint with leave to amend. Murugaiyan's amended complaint was due May 3, 2024. To date, no amended complaint has been filed.s

Accordingly, Murugaiyan is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Murugaiyan must file a written response to this order to show cause by no later than June 7, 2024. If Murugaiyan intends to move forward with this case, the amended complaint must also be filed by June 7, 2024. If Murugaiyan does not file both documents by that date, the Court will dismiss this action without further notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Murugaiyan v. Bank

United States District Court, Northern District of California
May 17, 2024
23-cv-04871-AMO (N.D. Cal. May. 17, 2024)
Case details for

Murugaiyan v. Bank

Case Details

Full title:SENTHIL MOHAN MURUGAIYAN, Plaintiff, v. ALLY BANK, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: May 17, 2024

Citations

23-cv-04871-AMO (N.D. Cal. May. 17, 2024)