William Redick v. FAVO Capital Inc.

Summary

This document is an order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California directing Plaintiff William Redick to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to prosecute, effect service, file proof of service, and comply with scheduling-order requirements. The order continues the mandatory scheduling conference from October 21, 2025, to December 4, 2025, and directs Plaintiff to serve the order on Defendant and file proof of service. It is dated October 16, 2025.

Holdings

1. The court may use its inherent power and Local Rule 110 to impose sanctions, including dismissal, when a party fails to comply with court rules or orders.
2. If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order service within a specified time; absent good cause, failure to comply requires dismissal of an unserved defendant.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff should be required to show cause why sanctions, including dismissal, should not be imposed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the court's orders.
2. Whether the mandatory scheduling conference should be continued because Plaintiff had not completed service or complied with the scheduling-report requirement.
3. Whether Plaintiff should be directed to serve the order on Defendant and file proof of service.

Disposition

other