Xiaofei Li v. Ur Jaddou

United States District Court for the Central District of California

Xiaofei Li v. Ur Jaddou

Trial Court Opinion

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

Case No.: 2:24-cv-02164-AB-JDEx Date: September 12, 2024

Title: Xiaofei Li v. Ur Jaddou et al

Present: The Honorable ANDRE BIROTTE JR., United States District Judge Daniel Tamayo N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

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

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 9/20/2024, 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): Ur Jaddou, Merrick Garland, Alejandro Mayorkas IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90 (12/02) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk DTA

Reference

Status
Unknown