Labbaik Ltd v. Jadoo TV, Inc.
- Susan Illston
- 3:20-cv-05878
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Labbaik v. Jadoo TV, Judge Illston adopted a recommendation and dismissed the case with prejudice because plaintiffs did not prosecute and lacked lawyers.
The dismissal affected Labbaik (Pvt) Ltd and the other organizational plaintiffs, as well as the defendants, including Jadoo TV, Inc.
What happened
In Labbaik (Pvt) Ltd v. Jadoo TV, Inc., the plaintiffs filed the case in 2020, but the court later questioned whether the organizational plaintiffs could proceed without lawyers.
The case was stayed after Jadoo TV, Inc. filed for bankruptcy. After the bankruptcy case ended, the court ordered the plaintiffs to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failing to pursue it or for lacking legal representation. The plaintiffs did not respond, and they also did not object to the later recommendation to dismiss.
Judge Susan Illston independently reviewed the case, adopted the recommendation in full, and dismissed the case with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Labbaik Ltd v. Jadoo TV, Inc. · No. 3:20-cv-05878
- Susan Illston
- Dec. 9, 2024
Background
Plaintiffs filed the complaint on August 20, 2020. On November 13, 2020, Magistrate Judge Westmore stayed the case after the court learned that defendant Jadoo TV, Inc. had filed a voluntary bankruptcy petition. The court also noted that it was unclear whether the case had been properly filed because the organizational plaintiffs were not represented by counsel.
After learning that the bankruptcy case had closed in early 2023, Judge Westmore lifted the stay on August 26, 2024. The court ordered plaintiffs to show cause—meaning explain—why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute or because the organizational plaintiffs lacked counsel. Plaintiffs were ordered to respond by September 6, 2024, but they never responded.
Recommendation and objections
On November 19, 2024, Judge Westmore recommended dismissal for three stated reasons: the plaintiffs were companies without counsel and therefore could not bring claims; plaintiffs had not filed anything in the case since 2020 and had not informed the court that the bankruptcy case had closed; and plaintiffs failed to respond to the show-cause order. The parties had 14 days to object to the recommendation, but the deadline passed without any objections.
Ruling
Judge Susan Illston independently reviewed the filings and agreed with Judge Westmore’s conclusions. The court adopted the report and recommendation in full and dismissed the case with prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.