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

Case No. CV 23-09907-SPG-MAA Date December 17, 2024 Ti Damien Sabella v. Doe 1 et al itle

a Present: The Honorable SHERILYN PEACE GARNETT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Patricia Gomez Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendants: Not Present Not Present

Proceeding: [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.,

(1962) (Court has inherent power to dismiss for lack of prosecution on its own motion). The below time period has not been met. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, orders Plaintiff to show cause, 1n writing, on or before January 3, 2025, why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. This matter will stand submitted upon the filing of Plaintiffs response. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78. Failure to respond will be deemed consent to the dismissal of the action. On July 31, 2024, the Court granted plaintiff's ex parte application for extension of time to serve summons and complaint within ninety (90) calendar days, plaintiff has failed to comply. Plaintiff has failed to file a proof of service within 90 days of the filing of the Complaint on Defendant Doe 1. Plaintiff can satisfy this order by showing that service was effectuated within the 90 day deadline. 00 00

Initials of Preparer pg