Tanesha Becker v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedAugust 10, 2023
Docket5:23-cv-00190
StatusUnknown

This text of Tanesha Becker v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. (Tanesha Becker v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.) 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
Tanesha Becker v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., (C.D. Cal. 2023).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. ED CV 23-00190 FMO (KKx) Date August 10, 2023 Title Tanesha Becker v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.

Present: The Honorable Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge Vanessa Figueroa None Present Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: None Present None Present Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions or Dismissal Pursuant to the Court’s Order of March 27, 2023, the parties were required to complete a settlement conference before a private mediator no later than July 24, 2023. (See Dkt. 17, Court’s Order of March 27, 2023, at 17). If the case settled, the parties were required to file a Notice of Settlement no later than 24 hours after settlement. (See id.). Otherwise, the parties were required to file a Status Report Re: Settlement no later than 48 hours after the settlement conference was complete. (See id.). As of the filing date of this Order, neither a Notice of Settlement nor a Status Report Re: Settlement has been filed. (See, generally, Dkt.). Accordingly, IT |S ORDERED THAT, no later than August 17, 2023, the parties shall show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to comply with the Court’s Order of March 27, 2023. Failure to submit a response to this Order by the deadline set forth above may result in the imposition of sanctions and/or dismissal of this action for lack of prosecution. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388 (1962); Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 909 (2003).

00 : 00 Initials of Preparer vdr

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Tanesha Becker v. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tanesha-becker-v-securitas-security-services-usa-inc-cacd-2023.