Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, Aconnecticut Corporation v. Dick Emard Electric

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 20, 2011

TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, ACONNECTICUT CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DICK EMARD ELECTRIC, INC. DBA EMARD ELECTRIC, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; LUKE EMARD, AN INDIVIDUAL; EMARD'S ELECTRICAL HOME TECHNICIANS, INC., AN ENTITY OF UNKNOWN FORM; AND EMARD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.*FN1

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge

ORDER CONTINUING STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE; FED. R. CIV. P. 4(M) NOTICE

Plaintiff states in its Status Report filed July 15, 2011: "Defendants DICK EMARD ELECTRIC, INC. dba EMARD ELECTRIC, a California corporation; EMARD'S ELECTRICAL HOME TECHNICIANS, INC., an entity of unknown form; and EMARD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a California corporation have been served, and defaults were entered against them on May 5, 2011." (ECF No. 14, 2:12-16.)

Plaintiff shall file a motion for entry of default judgment as to these Defendants before the Magistrate Judge within forty-five (45) days of the date on which this Order is filed. If Plaintiff fails to timely file the motion, Plaintiff shall show cause in writing no later than 4:00 p.m. on September 19, 2011, why these defendants should not be dismissed for failure of prosecution.

DISMISSAL OF DOE DEFENDANTS

Since Plaintiff has not justified Doe Defendants remaining in this action, Does 1-20 are dismissed. See Order Setting Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference filed March 16, 2011, at 2 n.2 (indicating that if justification for "Doe" defendant allegations not provided Doe defendants would be dismissed).

SERVICE OF LUKE EMARD

Plaintiff requests additional time to serve Defendant Luke Emard in its Status Report, stating "Plaintiff will request service by publication by August 29, 2011, if other service methods fail." (ECF No. 14, 3:9-11.)

Therefore, Plaintiff has an extension under Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure until September 16, 2011 to serve Defendant Luke Emard. Plaintiff is notified that Defendant Luke Emard may be dismissed as defendant in this action under Rule 4(m) unless Plaintiff provides proof of service or "shows good cause for the failure" to serve this defendant by September 16, 2011 in a filing due no later than 4:00 p.m. on September 19, 2011.

CONTINUANCE OF STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE

The status conference scheduled for hearing on August 1, 2011, is continued to commence at 9:00 a.m. on January 30, 2012. A status report shall be filed fourteen (14) days prior to the status conference in which Plaintiff is required to explain the status of the default proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.