Whitaker v. LSH Plus LLC
- Edward Davila
- 5:21-cv-00881
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Whitaker v. LSH Plus LLC, Judge Davila ordered Whitaker to explain why his case should not be dismissed for failing to move it forward.
Brian Whitaker, whose failure to meet the mediation-related deadline led to the order, and LSH Plus LLC, the defendant in the action.
What happened
Brian Whitaker sued LSH Plus LLC. The court said the parties’ deadline for a joint site inspection was November 1, 2021, and Whitaker’s deadline to request mediation was December 13, 2021.
Whitaker did not request mediation or ask for more time. The court therefore ordered him to explain in writing why the case should not be dismissed for failing to pursue it.
Judge Davila set January 24, 2022, as the deadline for Whitaker’s written response and scheduled a February 3, 2022, hearing. The court had not yet dismissed the case, but warned that it would dismiss the action with prejudice if Whitaker did not respond.
The detailed version
- Whitaker v. LSH Plus LLC · No. 5:21-cv-00881
- Edward Davila
- Jan. 7, 2022
Background
Brian Whitaker filed this action against LSH Plus LLC on February 4, 2021. The court previously approved the parties’ agreement to set aside the defendant’s default and directed the case to proceed under the court’s case-management procedures.
The parties’ last day to conduct a joint inspection of the site was November 1, 2021. Whitaker’s last day to file a notice requesting mediation was December 13, 2021. The opinion states that Whitaker did not file that notice and did not ask the court for relief from the December 13 deadline.
Order to Show Cause
The court issued an order to show cause, meaning an order requiring a party to explain why the court should not take a proposed action. Here, the court required Whitaker to explain why the action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, which means failing to move the case forward. The court relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and its authority to manage cases efficiently.
Disposition and Effect
The court directed Whitaker to file a written response by January 24, 2022, and to appear at a hearing on February 3, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. The court did not dismiss the action in this order. Instead, it warned that if Whitaker failed to file the required written response, the court would dismiss the action with prejudice under Rule 41(b).
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.