From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 11, 2022
ED CV 21-2139-DMG (MARx) (C.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2022)

Opinion

ED CV 21-2139-DMG (MARx)

02-11-2022

Marlin Smith, et al. v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation, et al.


Present: Honorable DOLLY M. GEE, 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. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). Generally, defendant must answer the complaint within 21 days after service (60 days if the defendant is the United States).

In the present case, it appears that these time periods have not been met. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing on or before February 18, 2022 why this action should not be dismissed as to defendant Sentry Credit, Inc. for lack of prosecution.

No oral argument of this matter will be heard unless ordered by the Court. The Order will stand submitted upon the filing of a written response on or before the date upon which a response by plaintiff(s) is due. This action will be dismissed as to defendant Sentry Credit, Inc. if a written response demonstrating good cause is not filed by the date indicated above. 1


Summaries of

Smith v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp.

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 11, 2022
ED CV 21-2139-DMG (MARx) (C.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2022)
Case details for

Smith v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp.

Case Details

Full title:Marlin Smith, et al. v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation, et al.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Feb 11, 2022

Citations

ED CV 21-2139-DMG (MARx) (C.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2022)