UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. EDCV 21-1692 JGB (SPx) Date April 19, 2023 Title Wendy Rosales, et al. v. Garrison Property and Casualty Insurance Company, et al.

Present: The Honorable JESUS G. BERNAL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

TANISHA CARRILLO Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s): Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s): None Present None Present

Proceedings: Order to Show Cause re Dismissal for Lack of Prosecution (IN CHAMBERS)

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) (“Rule 41(b)”), a district court may dismiss an action for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or failure to comply with the court’s orders. See Rule 41(b); see Chambers v. NASCO, Inc.,

(1991) (recognizing that a court “may act sua sponte to dismiss a suit for failure to prosecute”).

Here, it appears that plaintiffs have abandoned their suit. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, orders plaintiffs to show cause in writing on or before May 12, 2023, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Failure to comply with this deadline will result in the Court dismissing this case for lack of prosecution. See Rule 41(b).

Pursuant to Rule 78 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court finds that this matter is appropriate for submission without oral argument. The Order to Show Cause will stand submitted upon the filing of a responsive pleading or motion on or before the date upon which a response by the plaintiffs is due.

IT IS SO ORDERED.