From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wescott v. Jackley

United States District Court, Central District of California
Sep 8, 2022
2:22-cv-01615-SPG-AFM (C.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2022)

Opinion

2:22-cv-01615-SPG-AFM

09-08-2022

Carl A. Wescott v. Jessica Jackley et al


PRESENT THE HONORABLE SHERILYN PEACE GARNETT, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Proceedings: [In Chambers] Order To Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution

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 September 22, 2022, 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 Jessica Jackley 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

Wescott v. Jackley

United States District Court, Central District of California
Sep 8, 2022
2:22-cv-01615-SPG-AFM (C.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2022)
Case details for

Wescott v. Jackley

Case Details

Full title:Carl A. Wescott v. Jessica Jackley et al

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Sep 8, 2022

Citations

2:22-cv-01615-SPG-AFM (C.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2022)