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.

Advanced Engineering Solution, , A California Corporation, Inc. v. Paccar

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


July 23, 2012

ADVANCED ENGINEERING SOLUTION, , A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, INC. PLAINTIFF,
v.
PACCAR, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION; KENWORTH TRUCK COMPANY, AN UNKNOWN ENTITY; KALYPSO, INC., A CORPORATION; PARAMETRIC TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, A MASSACHUSETTS CORPORATION; ANDREW TIMM, AN INDIVIDUAL; JORDAN REYNOLDS, AN INDIVIDUAL; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

Plaintiff Advanced Engineering Solution, Inc. filed a complaint against Paccar, Inc., Kenworth Truck Company, Kalypso Inc., Parametric Technology Corporation, Andrew Timm, 22 Jordan Reynolds, and Does 1 through 100, inclusive (collectively, "Defendants") on June 1, 2011. 23 See ECF No. 1. On April 9, 2012, the case was reassigned to the undersigned judge. ECF No. 17. 24 On May 11, 2012, Defendant Andrew Timm filed a motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to 25 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). See ECF No. 28. Pursuant to Civil Local 26 Rule 7-3(a), Plaintiff's opposition to the motion to dismiss was due on May 25, 2012. Plaintiff has 27 not filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendant Timm's motion.

The hearing on Defendant Timm's motion and the case management conference set for

September 6, 2012 are VACATED. The Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why this 3 case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. This Order does not authorize Plaintiff to file 4 an untimely opposition to Defendant Timm's motion to dismiss. Plaintiff has until August 13, 5

2012, to file a response to this Order to Show Cause. A hearing on this Order to Show Cause is set 6 for August 30, 2012, at 1:30 P.M. Plaintiff's failure to respond to this Order to Show Cause and 7 to appear at the August 30, 2012 hearing will result in dismissal with prejudice for failure to 8 prosecute. 9 10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120723

© 1992-2012 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.