Opinion
For Ermita Alabado, an individual, Fernando Belidhon, an individual, Romar Cunanan, an individual, Armelinda Dela Cerna, an individual, Elmer Genito, an individual, Wilfredo Lariga Jr, an individual, Louise Luis, an individual, Gina Pablo Grossman, an individual, Recky Puzon, an individual, Ronaldo Santia, an individual, Rolando Suratos, an individual, Plaintiffs: Michael G Romey, LEAD ATTORNEY, Alexandra Yoshiko Welch, Grant Gabriel Cohen, Philip X Wang, Siddharth Nadkarni, Yi-Chin Ho, Latham and Watkins LLP, Los Angeles, CA; John C Trang, Nicole K Ochi, Asian Americans Advancing Justice Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA; Laboni A Hoq, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA; Yanin Senachai, Asian America Advancing Justice - LA, Los Angeles, CA.
For French Concepts, Inc., a California corporation, doing business as, L Amande French Bakery, French Concepts BH, a California Corporation, doing business as, L Amande French Bakery, Analiza Moitinho De Almeida, an individual, Goncalo Moitinho De Almeida, an individual, Defendants: Joshua Masatsura Kimura, LEAD ATTORNEY, Kimura London LLP, Irvine, CA; Anthony B Daye, Jacob C Gonzales, Weintraub Tobin Chediak Coleman Grodfin LC, Newport Beach, CA; Sherry S Bragg, Corbett H Williams, Weintraub Tobin, Newport Beach, CA.
For Baratow LLC, a Limited Liability Company, Defendant: Anthony B Daye, Jacob C Gonzales, Weintraub Tobin Chediak Coleman Grodfin LC, Newport Beach, CA; Sherry S Bragg, Corbett H Williams, Weintraub Tobin, Newport Beach, CA.
For Goncalo De Almeida, in his capacity as trustee of the AURORA RESIDENCE TRUST, Defendant: Jacob C Gonzales, Weintraub Tobin Chediak Coleman Grodfin LC, Newport Beach, CA.
Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal Re: Lack of Prosecution
The Honorable Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge.
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 120 days after the complaint is filed. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). Generally, a defendant must answer the complaint within 21 days after service (60 days if the defendant is the United States). Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a). The court may dismiss the action prior to the 120 days, however, if plaintiff(s) has/have not diligently prosecuted the action.
In the present case, it appears that one or more of these time periods has not been met. Accordingly, the court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing on or before August 31, 2015, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 78(b), the court finds that this matter is appropriate for submission without oral argument. The Order to Show Cause will stand submitted upon the filing of plaintiff's response, if plaintiff/defendant files:
■ An answer by the following defendant(s): ALL DEFENDANTS ■ Plaintiff's application for entry of default pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a): ALL DEFENDANTS [ ] Plaintiff's motion for default judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b):
on or before the date indicated above, the court will consider this a satisfactory response to the Order to Show Cause.