From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Xiaomei Zhao v. Jaddou

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jul 8, 2024
8:24-cv-00047-DSF-JDE (C.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2024)

Opinion

8:24-cv-00047-DSF-JDE

07-08-2024

XIAMOEI ZHAO Plaintiffs, v. UR M. JADDOU, et al. Defendants.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION

Dale S. Fischer United States District Judge

Generally, defendants must answer the complaint within 21 days after service or 60 days if the defendant is the United States. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(1).

In this case, Ur M. Jaddou, Joseph E. Langlois, Ted H. Kim, George Mihalko failed to plead or otherwise defend within the relevant time. The Court orders plaintiff to show cause in writing on or before July 22, 2024 why the claims against the non-appearing defendant(s) should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Failure to respond to this Order may result in sanctions, including dismissal for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Xiaomei Zhao v. Jaddou

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jul 8, 2024
8:24-cv-00047-DSF-JDE (C.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2024)
Case details for

Xiaomei Zhao v. Jaddou

Case Details

Full title:XIAMOEI ZHAO Plaintiffs, v. UR M. JADDOU, et al. Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jul 8, 2024

Citations

8:24-cv-00047-DSF-JDE (C.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2024)