Masonry Security Plan of Washington v. Puget Sound Flooring & Designs LLC

W.D. Washington

Masonry Security Plan of Washington v. Puget Sound Flooring & Designs LLC

DecidedJune 14, 2024

Docket2:22-cv-01462

StatusUnknown

This text of Masonry Security Plan of Washington v. Puget Sound Flooring & Designs LLC (Masonry Security Plan of Washington v. Puget Sound Flooring & Designs LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Masonry Security Plan of Washington v. Puget Sound Flooring & Designs LLC, (W.D. Wash. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2

3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 MASONRY SECURITY PLAN OF CASE NO. 2:22-cv-1462 8 WASHINGTON, BRICKLAYERS LOCAL NO. 2 PENSION TRUST, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 9 BRICKLAYERS & TROWEL TRADES INTERNATIONAL PENSION FUND, 10 and WESTERN WASHINGTON MASONRY TRADES 11 APPRENTICESHIP & TRAINING TRUST, 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. 14 PUGET SOUND FLOORING & 15 DESIGNS LLC, a Washington limited liability company, 16 Defendant. 17

18 Plaintiffs Masonry Security Plan of Washington, Bricklayers Local No. 2 19 Pension Trust, Bricklayers and Trowel Trades International Pension Fund, and 20 Western Washington Masonry Trades Apprenticeship and Training Trust sued 21 Defendant Puget Sound Flooring and Designs LLC on October 14, 2022. Dkt. No. 1. 22 Because Puget Sound Flooring failed to timely answer or otherwise appear, the 23 1 Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for entry of default on December 12, 2022. Dkt. No. 2 11. Since then, Plaintiffs have neither moved for default judgment nor taken any

3 other actions in this case. See Dkt.; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b) (describing the two- 4 step process for obtaining default judgment); LCR 55(b). 5 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to SHOW CAUSE why this matter 6 should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the 7 plaintiff fails to prosecute . . . , a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any 8 claim against it.”); see also Boards of Trustees of Nw. Ironworkers Health & Sec.

9 Fund v. Nw. Steelworks, LLC, No. C22-1540JLR, 2023 WL 5206374, at *1 (W.D. 10 Wash. Aug. 14, 2023) (citing Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1431, 1432 (9th Cir. 11 1986)). 12 Plaintiffs must respond to this order to show cause or file a motion for default 13 judgment by no later than June 28, 2024. If Plaintiffs fail to timely respond or to file 14 a motion for default judgment, the Court will dismiss this action with prejudice 15 without further notice for failure to prosecute.

16 17 Dated this 14th day of June, 2024. 18 A 19 Jamal N. Whitehead 20 United States District Judge 21 22

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

1 2

3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 MASONRY SECURITY PLAN OF CASE NO. 2:22-cv-1462 8 WASHINGTON, BRICKLAYERS LOCAL NO. 2 PENSION TRUST, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 9 BRICKLAYERS & TROWEL TRADES INTERNATIONAL PENSION FUND, 10 and WESTERN WASHINGTON MASONRY TRADES 11 APPRENTICESHIP & TRAINING TRUST, 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. 14 PUGET SOUND FLOORING & 15 DESIGNS LLC, a Washington limited liability company, 16 Defendant. 17

18 Plaintiffs Masonry Security Plan of Washington, Bricklayers Local No. 2 19 Pension Trust, Bricklayers and Trowel Trades International Pension Fund, and 20 Western Washington Masonry Trades Apprenticeship and Training Trust sued 21 Defendant Puget Sound Flooring and Designs LLC on October 14, 2022. Dkt. No. 1. 22 Because Puget Sound Flooring failed to timely answer or otherwise appear, the 23 1 Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for entry of default on December 12, 2022. Dkt. No. 2 11. Since then, Plaintiffs have neither moved for default judgment nor taken any

3 other actions in this case. See Dkt.; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b) (describing the two- 4 step process for obtaining default judgment); LCR 55(b). 5 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to SHOW CAUSE why this matter 6 should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the 7 plaintiff fails to prosecute . . . , a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any 8 claim against it.”); see also Boards of Trustees of Nw. Ironworkers Health & Sec.

9 Fund v. Nw. Steelworks, LLC, No. C22-1540JLR, 2023 WL 5206374, at *1 (W.D. 10 Wash. Aug. 14, 2023) (citing Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1431, 1432 (9th Cir. 11 1986)). 12 Plaintiffs must respond to this order to show cause or file a motion for default 13 judgment by no later than June 28, 2024. If Plaintiffs fail to timely respond or to file 14 a motion for default judgment, the Court will dismiss this action with prejudice 15 without further notice for failure to prosecute.

16 17 Dated this 14th day of June, 2024. 18 A 19 Jamal N. Whitehead 20 United States District Judge 21 22

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Masonry Security Plan of Washington v. Puget Sound Flooring & Designs LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/masonry-security-plan-of-washington-v-puget-sound-flooring-designs-llc-wawd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack