United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, 2026

Marie Cassano v. Princess Cruise Lines Ltd. et al

Marie Cassano v. Princess Cruise Lines Ltd. et al
United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida · Decided January 14, 2026
Marie Cassano v. Princess Cruise Lines Ltd. et al

Trial Court Opinion

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

Case No.: 2:25-cv-11759-SVW-MAR Date: January 14, 2026

Title: Marie Cassano v. Princess Cruise Lines Ltd. et al

Present: The Honorable STEPHEN V. WILSON, 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 January 23, 2026, 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(s) Princess Cruise Lines Ltd. 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.

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