Opinion
1:21-cv-00845 DAD JLT
08-27-2021
MATTHEW GARRETT PH.D., et al., Plaintiffs, v. CHRISTOPHER W. HINE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO
SHOW CAUSE
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The plaintiffs initiated this action on May 25, 2021 but had not filed proof of service by August 6, 2021. (Docs. 1, 4) Consequently, the Court ordered the plaintiffs to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for their failure to prosecute the action and to comply with the orders of the Court that they “diligently pursue service” of the action and to “promptly file proofs of service.” (Doc. 3 at 1)
In response to the order to show cause, the plaintiffs filed a timeline in which they demonstrate that they sent a request to waive service the action on July 22, 21021. (Doc. 10 at 2) They offer no explanation why they failed to serve the action or seek the waiver of the service for nearly two months. Id. They also fail to explain why they feel that sanctions should not be imposed despite the order to show cause. Id. Submitting a timeline confirming the fact that they have not complied with the Court's orders, does not suffice.
In future, the plaintiffs and their counsel SHALL comply with the orders of the Court and i they SHALL diligently prosecute this action. Likewise, when the Court orders them to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed, they SHALL do so, or the Court will impose sanctions. Therefore, the Court ORDERS:
1. The order to show cause is DISCHARGED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.