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.

Robin Walker et al v. U.S. Department of Commerce

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 22, 2011

ROBIN WALKER ET AL.,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CASE

I. INTRODUCTION

On July 18, 2011, Plaintiff Robin Walker filed a complaint against the United States Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Araceli Barcelos, Anthony Munoz, and Salvidor Ramiriz. (Doc. 1.) The Court issued a scheduling order and set the initial scheduling conference for November 3, 2011. (Doc. 3.) Summonses as to each defendant were issued on July 20, 2011. (Docs 4-8.) No executed summonses were filed.

On October 20, 2011, Plaintiff Walker filed a First Amended Complaint ("FAC") joining additional plaintiffs and defendants. (Doc. 9.) The FAC joined James Braun, Maria Dupras, Mona Perez, and Melissa Carmichael as plaintiffs. The FAC also named additional defendants: (1) Jeffery Enos; (2) Celeste Jiminez; (3) James T. Christy; (4) Kurtis Docken; (5) Joel Alonzo; (6) Patrick Hescox; (7) Sandra Iraheta Aguilara; (8) Julie Lam; and (9) Geof Rolat. On October 25, 2011, summonses were issued as to the additionally named defendants. (Docs. 10-12.)

On October 28, 2011, the Court issued an order requiring Plaintiffs to file executed summonses on or before November 17, 2011, as to the defendants who had been served and to file a status report indicating when service would be completed as to any defendants that had not been served as of November 17, 2011. (Doc. 13.) The Court also vacated the November 3, 2011, scheduling conference.

Plaintiff filed executed summonses as to the following defendants: (1) U.S. Department of Commerce (Docs. 15, 16); (2) Census Bureau (Doc. 14); (3) James T. Christy (Doc. 17); (4) Jeffrey Enos (Doc. 17); (5) Celeste Jiminez (Doc. 17); (6) Julie Lam (Doc. 18); (7) Geof Rolat (Doc. 18); and (8) Araceli Barcelos (Doc. 19).

II. DISCUSSION

Although required by the Court's October 28, 2011, order, no status report was filed providing information whether the following defendants have been or will be served: (1) Salvidor Ramiriz; (2) Anthony Munoz; (3) Kurtis Docken; (4) Joel Alonzo; (5) Patrick Hescox; and (6) Sandra Iraheta Aguilara (collectively, "unserved Defendants"). On December 9, 2011, the Court issued an order requiring Plaintiffs to show cause why a status report was not filed or, alternatively to file a report indicating the status of service of the FAC as to the unserved Defendants.

On December 16, 2011, Plaintiffs filed a status report. (Doc. 22.) Despite diligent efforts, Plaintiffs' report indicates difficulty locating and serving the remaining defendants. As Plaintiffs have shown good cause, an extension of the time to serve the complaint will be granted. In light of the scheduling conference currently set for March 6, 2012, Plaintiff shall file a status report on or before February 6, 2012, indicating the status of service of the currently unserved Defendants or file executed summonses as to those Defendants.

III. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The December 9, 2011, order to show cause is DISCHARGED;

2. Plaintiffs shall file a status report on or before February 6, 2012, indicating the status of service of the currently unserved Defendants or file executed summonses as to those Defendants.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20111222

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



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.