Raymond Wright v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., et al.
This text of Raymond Wright v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., et al. (Raymond Wright v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., et al.) 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.
Opinion
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 2:25-cv-11466-SSC Date: December 31, 2025 Title Raymond Wright v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., et al.
Present: The Honorable Stephanie S. Christensen, U.S. Magistrate Judge
Teagan Snyder n/a Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: None Present None Present
Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) Order to Show Cause Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed
Raymond Wright claims that his former employer, Skywest Airlines, Inc. discriminated against him. He filed suit in a state court on October 23, 2025. (ECF 1-1 at 14.) Skywest removed the action to this court on December 1, 2025. (ECF 1.) The removal packet contained a proof of service appearing to show that Skywest was served with the summons and complaint on October 29, 2025; it did not contain an answer by Skywest. (ECF 1-1.) Rule 81 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a defendant who failed to file an answer in state court prior to removal must do so within the longest of: (A) 21 days after receiving—through service or otherwise—a copy of the initial pleading stating the claim for relief; CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No. 2:25-cv-11466-SSC Date: December 31, 2025 Title Raymond Wright v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., et al.
(B) 21 days after being served with the summons for an initial pleading on file at the time of service; or (C) 7 days after the notice of removal is filed.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 81(c)(2). All deadlines have passed and Skywest has not filed an answer or Rule 12 motion. Accordingly, Skywest is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to file a timely response to the complaint. See McCabe v. Arave, 827 F.2d 634, 640 (9th Cir. 1987) (finding that the district court had inherent power to impose sanctions for a late-filed answer upon a finding of bad faith). Skywest must respond to this order no later than January 7, 2026.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
: Initials of Preparer ts
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Raymond Wright v. Skywest Airlines, Inc., et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raymond-wright-v-skywest-airlines-inc-et-al-cacd-2025.