Hernandez v. Mai
- Edward Davila
- 5:19-cv-03029
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Hernandez v. Mai, Judge Demarchi ordered Hernandez to explain why his case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failing to prosecute.
Gerardo Hernandez must file a written response and appear at the scheduled hearing to address the possible dismissal of his action. Chi Mai and Kim Hang Bui are the defendants whose defaults had been entered and whose case could be dismissed without prejudice.
What happened
In Hernandez v. Mai, Gerardo Hernandez sued Chi Mai and Kim Hang Bui. The defendants were served but did not appear, and the clerk entered defaults against them after Hernandez requested it.
The court had ordered Hernandez to file a status report by December 12, 2019. He did not file one or ask for more time, and no action had been taken in the case since the defaults were entered.
The court ordered Hernandez to respond in writing by December 18 and appear on December 20 to explain why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The order was signed by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. Demarchi.
The detailed version
- Hernandez v. Mai · No. 5:19-cv-03029
- Edward Davila
- Dec. 13, 2019
Background
Gerardo Hernandez filed the action against Chi Mai and Kim Hang Bui on May 31,
- Hernandez served both defendants on June 16,
- Neither defendant appeared. Hernandez moved for entry of default against both defendants on July 31, 2019, and the clerk entered default on August 2,
- The opinion states that no action had been taken since then.
On December 5, 2019, the court ordered Hernandez to file a status report by December 12. He did not file the report by the deadline and did not seek relief from the deadline.
Order
The court issued an order to show cause, meaning Hernandez was required to explain why the case should not be dismissed. The court stated that it has inherent authority to dismiss an action to achieve the orderly and efficient handling of cases. It directed Hernandez to file a written response by December 18 and appear in court on December 20 to show cause why the action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
The opinion does not state that the action was dismissed. It requires Hernandez to respond and appear before the court decides whether to dismiss it.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.