From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Singh v. Taraska

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 20, 2024
2:24-cv-02080-SB-PVC (C.D. Cal. Jun. 20, 2024)

Opinion

2:24-cv-02080-SB-PVC

06-20-2024

MANINDER SINGH et al., Plaintiffs, v. RICHARD TARASKA et al., Defendants.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE LACK OF PROSECUTION

Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr. United States District Judge

Generally, a plaintiff must serve process on defendants within 90 days of the filing of the complaint. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). The complaint in this matter was filed on March 13, 2024. Dkt. No. 1. More than 90 days have passed since the complaint in this case was filed, and Plaintiffs have not filed a proof of service. Plaintiffs are ordered to show cause, in writing, no later than June 26, 2024, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. No oral argument on this matter will be heard unless otherwise ordered by the Court. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; Local Rule 7-15.

The Court will consider as an appropriate response to this order to show cause (OSC) the filing of proof of service showing that Defendants were served within the 90-day period or a showing of good cause supporting a request to extend the service period. The filing of a proof of service shall result in the automatic discharge of this OSC without further order. Failure to timely respond to the OSC will be construed as consent to dismissal without prejudice of Plaintiffs' claims.


Summaries of

Singh v. Taraska

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 20, 2024
2:24-cv-02080-SB-PVC (C.D. Cal. Jun. 20, 2024)
Case details for

Singh v. Taraska

Case Details

Full title:MANINDER SINGH et al., Plaintiffs, v. RICHARD TARASKA et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jun 20, 2024

Citations

2:24-cv-02080-SB-PVC (C.D. Cal. Jun. 20, 2024)