From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Bao

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 28, 2024
CV 24-00376-SPG-SSC (C.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2024)

Opinion

CV 24-00376-SPG-SSC

02-28-2024

Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Bao


Present: The Honorable SHERILYN PEACE GARNETT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Proceeding: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER

Plaintiff(s) are ORDERED to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626 (1962) (Court has inherent power to dismiss for lack of prosecution on its own motion).

The below time period(s) has not been met. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, orders Plaintiff(s) to show cause, in writing, on or before March 13, 2024, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. This matter will stand submitted upon the filing of Plaintiff(s) response. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 78. Failure to respond will be deemed consent to the dismissal of the action.

Defendant Yueyu Bao did not answer the complaint, yet Plaintiff(s) have failed to request entry of default, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a). Plaintiff(s) can satisfy this order by seeking entry of default or by dismissing the complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Bao

United States District Court, Central District of California
Feb 28, 2024
CV 24-00376-SPG-SSC (C.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2024)
Case details for

Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Bao

Case Details

Full title:Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Bao

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Feb 28, 2024

Citations

CV 24-00376-SPG-SSC (C.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2024)