E.K.B. v. City of Azusa

C.D. California

E.K.B. v. City of Azusa

DecidedMarch 15, 2023

Docket2:23-cv-01067

StatusUnknown

This text of E.K.B. v. City of Azusa (E.K.B. v. City of Azusa) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

E.K.B. v. City of Azusa, (C.D. Cal. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

Case 2:23-cv-01067-SPG-JDE Document15 Filed 03/15/23 Page lof1 Page ID #:53 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL

Case No. CV 23-01067-SPG(JDEx) Date March 15, 2023 Title E.K.B et al v. City of Azusa et al 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: 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 March 31, 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.

Defendant(s) City of Azusa, and Michael Bertelson 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 ISSO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer pg

Page 1 of 1

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Case 2:23-cv-01067-SPG-JDE Document15 Filed 03/15/23 Page lof1 Page ID #:53 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL

Case No. CV 23-01067-SPG(JDEx) Date March 15, 2023 Title E.K.B et al v. City of Azusa et al 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: 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 March 31, 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.

Defendant(s) City of Azusa, and Michael Bertelson 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 ISSO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer pg

Page 1 of 1

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

E.K.B. v. City of Azusa, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ekb-v-city-of-azusa-cacd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack