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.

Michael J. Keevern v. Wells Fargo Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 3, 2013

MICHAEL J. KEEVERN
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., 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 SETTING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS MATTER SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF PROSEUCTION

This case was removed on April 13, 2012. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("WFB") and Fidelity National Title Insurance Company ("FNITC") were named as Defendants. Dkt. 1. On July 17, 2012, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (the "FAC"), which also named WFB and FNITC as Defendants. Dkt. 24. On November 5, 2012, the Court granted WFB's motion to dismiss the FAC as to WFB, with leave to amend in part (Dkt. 35); no amended complaint was filed, leaving FNITC as the sole, remaining Defendant in this action. Thus, judgment was entered as to WFB. Dkt. 43.

Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service as to FNITC, and it has not made an appearance in this matter. For these reasons, the Court sets an Order to Show Cause why this action should not be dismissed as to FNITC for lack of prosecution. Plaintiff is directed to file, on or before January 23, 2013, a proof of service as to FNITC, or a declaration under penalty of perjury as to what efforts have been made to effect service and when Plaintiff expects service to be completed. A status conference in this matter as to service of process and prosecution as to FNITC is set for January 28, 2013 at 1:30 p.m. The Court will consider the filing of a responsive pleading to the First Amended Complaint and/or an appropriate response to the Order to Show Cause on or before January 23, 2013, as a potential basis to take the January 28, 2013 hearing off calendar. Plaintiff's failure to file a timely respond to this Order and/or Plaintiff's failure to appear at the January 28, 2013 hearing, will result in the dismissal of the action for lack of prosecution and failure to follow the Court's orders.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130103

© 1992-2013 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.