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.

Estate of Muhanad Shalabi, et al. v. City of Fontana

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 26, 2012

ESTATE OF MUHANAD SHALABI, ET AL.
v.
CITY OF FONTANA, ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable John A. Kronstadt, United States District Judge

CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL

Present: The Honorable JOHN A. KRONSTADT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Andrea Keifer Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: Not Present Not Present Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER RE DISMISSING CASE FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION JS-6

On September 10, 2012, the Court granted the Defendants' motion to dismiss in part, and directed that Plaintiff file an amended complaint on or before October 15, 2012. Dkt. 31. Plaintiff did not comply with this Order. Thus, no amended complaint was filed. On October 29, 2012, Plaintiff failed to appear at the Status Conference set in this matter at which time Plaintiff was required to appear to discuss his failure to file an amended complaint and overall scheduling in the matter. Plaintiff failed to appear. As a result, the Court Ordered Plaintiff to file a declaration by November 13, 2012, explaining his non-appearance and failure to comply with the Court's September 10, 2012 Order with respect to the filing of an amended complaint. Dkt. 35. Given the prior failures to follow the Court's Orders, the Court also stated that the matter would be dismissed should Plaintiff fail to file timely a declaration or adequately explain the failure to file a second amended complaint as ordered. Plaintiff has not filed a declaration as ordered. In light of the history of Plaintiff's failure to prosecute and to comply with the Court's Orders, this action is dismissed, without prejudice. Should Plaintiff seek to revive the action, the Court will consider whether to permit its prosecution based on the explanations that may be advanced for the non-compliance with the Court's Orders to date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20121226

© 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.