Van Winkle v. Cherokee Insurance

CourtDistrict Court, D. New Mexico
DecidedMarch 5, 2024
Docket1:23-cv-00969
StatusUnknown

This text of Van Winkle v. Cherokee Insurance (Van Winkle v. Cherokee Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Mexico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Van Winkle v. Cherokee Insurance, (D.N.M. 2024).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

MICHAEL VAN WINKLE,

Plaintiff,

v. No. 1:23-cv-969 DHU/KRS

FANTON LOGISTICS, INC., CHEROKEE INSURANCE COMPANY, and LASHA KVERNADZE,

Defendants.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

THIS MATTER comes before the Court sua sponte. Plaintiff initiated this action in State Court on July 25, 2023, and Defendant Fanton Logistics, Inc., removed the case to this Court on November 3, 2023. (Doc. 1). Defendants Fanton Logistics, Inc. and Cherokee Insurance Company have filed answers to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and the Court entered a Stipulated Order bifurcating and staying Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Cherokee Insurance Company until after resolution of the personal injury claims. (Docs. 3, 14, 21). The docket does not reflect that Defendant Kvernadze has been served, and no answer or other responsive pleading has been filed by Defendant Kvernadze. See (Doc. 10) (Affidavit of Non-Service on Defendant Kvernadze). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), Plaintiff is required to serve all Defendants within ninety days of filing the complaint. In addition, Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes the Court to dismiss an action sua sponte for failure to prosecute. See Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003); see also D.N.M. LR-Civ. 41.1 (“A civil action may be dismissed if, for a period of ninety (90) calendar days, no steps are taken to move the case forward.”). More than ninety days have passed since Plaintiff took any step to move this case forward as to Defendant Kvernadze. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that on or before March 11, 2024, Plaintiff must provide the Court with a written explanation showing good cause why this case should not be dismissed as to Defendant Kvernadze for failure to prosecute.

KEVIN R. SWEAZEA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

Related

Olsen v. Mapes
333 F.3d 1199 (Tenth Circuit, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Van Winkle v. Cherokee Insurance, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-winkle-v-cherokee-insurance-nmd-2024.