From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Petten v. McDonough

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 24, 2021
2:21-1956-MCS (MAR) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 24, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-1956-MCS (MAR)

06-24-2021

Wade Van Petten v. Denis McDonough


Present: The Honorable: MARGO A. ROCCONI, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Proceedings: (In Chambers) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION

On March 2, 2021, Wade Van Petten (“Plaintiff”), filed a pro se Civil Rights Complaint (“Complaint”). ECF Docket No. (“Dkt.”) 1. On March 3, 2021, a 60 Days Summons was issued regarding the Complaint. Dkt. 3. To date, Plaintiff has failed to provide the Court with Proof of Service in compliance with the March 4, 2021, Case Management Order. See Dkt. 5.

Therefore, Plaintiff is ordered to show cause in writing on or before July 8, 2021 (14) days of this Order why this action should not be dismissed under Rules 41(b) and 4(1)-(m) for failure to prosecute or provide the Court with Proof of Service. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(1)-(m), 5(d)(1)(b)(i), 41(b); Dkt. 5 at 1-2.

The Court will consider either of the following two (2) options to be an appropriate response to this OSC:

1. Plaintiff shall provide the Court with Proof of Service; or
2. Plaintiff shall provide the Court with an explanation as to why he has failed to file a Proof of Service and request an extension of time.

Failure to respond to the Court's Order may result in the dismissal of the action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Petten v. McDonough

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 24, 2021
2:21-1956-MCS (MAR) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 24, 2021)
Case details for

Petten v. McDonough

Case Details

Full title:Wade Van Petten v. Denis McDonough

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jun 24, 2021

Citations

2:21-1956-MCS (MAR) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 24, 2021)