United States District Court for the Central District of California, 2023

Pan Digital Network Limited v. 2069913 Ontario Limited

Pan Digital Network Limited v. 2069913 Ontario Limited
United States District Court for the Central District of California · Decided May 1, 2023
Pan Digital Network Limited v. 2069913 Ontario Limited

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL Case No. CV 23-00584-SPG(MAAx) Date May 1, 2023 Title Pan Digital Network Limited v. 2069913 Ontario Limited et al ee Present: The Honorable SHERILYN PEACE GARNETT _UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE P. Gomez Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendants: Not Present Not Present Proceeding: (INCHAMBERS) 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 May 16, 2023, 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.

Absent a showing of good cause, an action must be dismissed without prejudice if the summons and complaint are not served on a Defendant within 90 days after the complaint is filed. Plaintiff(s) have failed to file a proof of service within 90 days of the filing of the Complaint on the following Defendant(s): e 2069913 Ontario Limited e Christopher Fagon e Andrew Burrows-Trotman UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL Case No. CV 23-00584-SPG(MAAx) Date May 1, 2023 Title New York Life Insurance Company v. Louise Saadian et al Plaintiff(s) can satisfy this order by showing that service was effectuated within the 90 day deadline or by showing good cause for the failure to do so. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

Plaintiff(s) obtained entry of default as to Defendant’s listed below, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a), but Plaintiff(s) have not sought default judgment, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b). Plaintiff(s) can satisfy this order by seeking default judgment or by notifying the Court that default judgment will not be sought. e Cristaudo Holdings, LLC e Frank Cristaudo IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer pg

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.