First Mercury Insurance Company v. Dongbu Insurance Company Ltd et al
| First Mercury Insurance Company |
| Dongbu Insurance Company Ltd, Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company, Otilia Lopez, Navigators Insurance Company, Magdalena Mesinas Sandoval Rey, Victor Rey and United Intermodal Transport, Inc. |
| 2:2016cv03140 |
| May 6, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dolly M. Gee |
| Patrick J. Walsh |
| Insurance |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
20
(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Dolly M. Gee.Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing on or before September 13, 2016 why this action should not be dism issed for lack of prosecution. As an alternative to a written response by plaintiff(s), the Court will consider the filing of one of the following, as an appropriate response to this Order To Show Cause, on or before the above date, as evidence th at the matter is being prosecuted diligently: An answer by the defendants; Plaintiff's application for entry of default pursuant to Rule 55a of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; No oral argument of this matter will be heard unless ordered by the Court. The Order will stand submitted upon the filing of a responsive pleading or motion on or before the date upon which a response by plaintiff(s) is due. This action will be dismissed if the above-mentioned document(s) are not filed by the date indicated above. (clee)
|
|
Filing
10
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Dolly M. Gee.Absent a showing of good cause, an action must be dismissed without prejudice if the summons and complaint are not served on a defendant within 9 0 days after the complaint is filed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Generally, defendant must answer the complaint within 21 days after service (60 days if the defendant is the United States). In the present case, it appears that these time periods have not been met. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing on or before August 19, 2016 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. No oral argument of this matter will be heard unles s ordered by the Court. The Order will stand submitted upon the filing of a written response on or before the date upon which a response by plaintiff(s) is due. This action will be dismissed if a written response demonstrating good cause is not filed by the date indicated above. (clee)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
